Officer shoots suspect in San Diego movie theater
SAN DIEGO (AP) - Police shot and critically wounded a man suspected of chasing his girlfriend with a handgun after they found him hiding inside a movie theater.
Officers went to an outdoor shopping center in northern San Diego on Saturday afternoon in response to a domestic violence call, Officer David Stafford said. He said the shooting occurred inside the Reading Cinemas theater about 3:50 p.m.
No other details were immediately released.
A San Diego Fire-Rescue Department dispatcher said the suspect was taken to a hospital with life-threatening injuries.
The owner of a business next to the theater said officers told him the armed man chased his girlfriend across a parking lot. Steve Krongard, the owner of the Nickel City arcade, said police shut down the lot, checked every car leaving the mall and went from businesses to business to look for the suspect until they found him in the theater.
"There were 20 police cars blocking the entrance, then the fire truck and the ambulance rushed in," Krongard said. "Then we saw seven cops with what looked like rifles, then paramedics went into the theater."
U-T San Diego reports the shooting occurred during a screening of "Les Miserables." Witnesses were evacuated from the theater.
Adrian Amante, the owner of the Home Trends store, told the newspaper people started running out of the theater and hiding behind cars.
It was the second shooting at a San Diego County movie theater in as many days.
A concession worker suffered an arm injury when a shot fired outside a San Marcos movie theater went through the lobby window and struck her, sheriff's officials said.
The shooting occurred during a fight in the parking lot at Edwards San Marcos Stadium 18 and triggered a large police response because authorities were initially not sure whether there was a shooter inside the Cineplex.
No arrests have been reported after San Marcos shooting.
Officers went to an outdoor shopping center in northern San Diego on Saturday afternoon in response to a domestic violence call, Officer David Stafford said. He said the shooting occurred inside the Reading Cinemas theater about 3:50 p.m.
No other details were immediately released.
A San Diego Fire-Rescue Department dispatcher said the suspect was taken to a hospital with life-threatening injuries.
The owner of a business next to the theater said officers told him the armed man chased his girlfriend across a parking lot. Steve Krongard, the owner of the Nickel City arcade, said police shut down the lot, checked every car leaving the mall and went from businesses to business to look for the suspect until they found him in the theater.
"There were 20 police cars blocking the entrance, then the fire truck and the ambulance rushed in," Krongard said. "Then we saw seven cops with what looked like rifles, then paramedics went into the theater."
U-T San Diego reports the shooting occurred during a screening of "Les Miserables." Witnesses were evacuated from the theater.
Adrian Amante, the owner of the Home Trends store, told the newspaper people started running out of the theater and hiding behind cars.
It was the second shooting at a San Diego County movie theater in as many days.
A concession worker suffered an arm injury when a shot fired outside a San Marcos movie theater went through the lobby window and struck her, sheriff's officials said.
The shooting occurred during a fight in the parking lot at Edwards San Marcos Stadium 18 and triggered a large police response because authorities were initially not sure whether there was a shooter inside the Cineplex.
No arrests have been reported after San Marcos shooting.
Everyone keeps putting up statistics about gun related crimes. Â Lets take a look at who is comitting the crimes.
How many are gang related?
How many are drug related? Â
How many are crimes related to property?
Â
I would guess that these are where you are going to find the highest gun related crimes. Â And guess what. Â Gun laws are not going to target these people. Â Gun laws will target those you are the victims of these crimes.
Â
People have a right to protect themselves. Â Police show up and take a report from the families of the victims. Â I know because I was a police officer for 7 years. Â Take the guns away from people and you invite criminals to be more active because you take away the risk they face.
the problem is the proliferation of guns in our society.
Â
All you have to do is look at any country which has every thing else the same as this one except the love affair we have with guns.
Â
yet they don't have nearly the same amount of gun violence.
Â
explain that one away nra....
 @sunnysandiego Violence is violence, regardless of the tool used. The US is ranked #1 of private gun ownership (88 per 100 people), yet we are ranked #28 for gun murders (2.97 per 100k), and not even ranked in the top 10 for violent crime (466 per 100k).
The UK has a total gun ban, and they are now ranked #1 in violent crime (2,034 per 100k).
Â
Â
 @equinator  @sunnysandiego Not sure where you got your data - probably from the NRA - but the only statistic you quote correctly is the U.S. gun ownership rate, which in fact is 88.8/100.  According to Wikipedia, we are #9 for gun related deaths at 10.2/100K.
Â
According to multiple sources, the U.S. has far and away the highest overall crime rate followed by the UK. Â The difference between them is that, at #9, Â the U.S. has a higher firearms related crime rate. Â The crime rate you cite for the UK is for all violent crime, so you're comparing apples to oranges. Â Their gun related death rate is .25/100K and they rank 66th in firearms related deaths
Â
The U.S. also has the distinction of being the number one industrialized country on the firearms related death rate list. Â The next nearest is Switzerland (#4 in the world with 45.7/100) at 18.
Â
If you look objectively at these statistics, the inescapable conclusion is that the higher the gun ownership rate, the higher the firearms related death rate. Â The argument that increased firearms ownership reduces the crime rate is belied by the fact that the U.S. has both the highest gun ownership rate and also the highest overall crime rate.
 @equinator At some point, the pro gun crowd is going to have to deal with this chart.
Â
http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/50cf5c5eecad049f7a000004-1785-1483-590-/deaths-vs-guns.pngÂ
 @T H I S  @equinator Interestingly, the highest on that chart is also a country with a low number of guns per 100 people and at the same time has the strictest gun control there is. The chart has some general trend but any analysis at all shows its not conclusive.
 @sunnysandiego  @T H I S  @equinator Dont be afraid. Say it. Where do they come from? But by the way say how they get them not just the point of manufacture. You do want to be honest about what you say right?
 @T H I S  @equinator right up there with Mexico which by the way gets the vast majority of its guns from guess where?
 @equinator Adjusting for population, the U.S. death rate by firearms -- which includes homicides, suicide and accidents -- was 10.2 per 100,000 people in 2009, according to the Coalition for Gun Control. The closest developed country was Finland, with a firearms death rate of 4.47 per 100,000 people in 2008, less than half that of the U.S. rate. In Canada, the rate was 2.5 per 100,000 people in 2009. In the United Kingdom, the 2011 rate was 0.25 per 100,000 people.
Â
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/20/us-guns-statistics-outlier_n_2331892.html
Â
the issue with guns in our society is not violence it's simply the ease we give anyone a gun. Â And multiple guns. Â The more guns we have in our society the more likely it is someone who is bad is going to get their hands on it.
Â
Â
 @sunnysandiego  @equinator Bias report by a bias group.
Â
Bad people already have guns so taking them from law abiding people is not going to stop anything. Â It will just make more victims.
Put officer friendly, packing a gun, anywhere there a given number of people, like theaters and in particular schools. It won't be cheap, but it's necessary and more responsible than arming janitors and teachers. Pay for it with a surcharge on gun sales and ammo sales. That's reasonable and fair, and leaves intact the right to bear arms. Or is this solution too simple or too safe?
 @uscit16791949 So we pay for the bad guys by punishing the good guys,. Doesn't make sense.
 @SeattleJoe Tell me what doesn't work that way? It makes sense to me, you create the situation, you pay for it. The gun culture pays for the security that is needed because of the presence of guns. You don't like the tax? Don't buy guns or ammo.
 @uscit16791949 You simple minded approach is woefully incorrect. The gun owners that you want to punish with fees/taxes didn't create the situation. As the saying goes "Saying guns are the cause of violence is like saying spoons made Rossie Odonnell fat". Or to put it another way, you are not charged a fee on your car to cover the issues created by drunk drivers. Why, because you didn't cause a person to drive drunk anymore than gun owners caused some nut to use a firearm for violence.
 @uscit16791949 Lets see ,,, one cop in a Galaxy 10 theater complex ,,,, hows that gonna work. Your so called solution is based on huge amounts of taxes to be collected on static sales. Guns and ammo are not sold daily like gasoline. The number of cops needed to fully cover every school, theater, shopping mall, church, etc, etc. is staggering. A willing, trained janitor or teacher is way better than no resistance at all.
 @Snoop Please tell me you aren't that ignorant.... Guns and ammo are in fact sold daily. In fact, just the sales of ammo alone would pay for the needed security. Got something against taxes and security? You're living in the wrong place. Only idiots, Republicans, and tax evaders, guess that would be considered redundant, would favor arming teachers and janitors over trained police officers doing their job protecting citizens watching a movie or children attending school. Both are exceptionally vulnerable for a number of reasons, the chief being preoccupation.Â
I hope this is all starting to make sense to you all you anti gun fanatics now....that we simply cannot afford to let only the criminals have them.
An armed society is a polite society. This is the bottom line.
 @TreeTopFlyer You get the award for the most simplistic, NRA-fed, answer of the morning. Guncontrol does NOT mean we want only the criminals to guns. The idea is that only law enforcement and military have guns.
Â
I rather like this, it makes it easy to see gun control does to a country:
http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/50cf5c5eecad049f7a000004-1785-1483-590-/deaths-vs-guns.png
(Thanks goes to T H I S, for digging this one up)
 @DrugFighter  @TreeTopFlyer PS "I rather like this, it makes it easy to see gun control does to a country:"
I like what this chart shows gun control did for Mexico.
 @DrugFighter  @TreeTopFlyer Yup. And with the people disarmed now any thug with a tire iron can go smash in granny's head and steal everything. With a gun she can fend him off. Yup, we like the lets all be defenseless idea, but tell you what lets have all the anti-gunners first prove it works by putting signs in their yards and apartment doors etc to indicate they are gun free. After a few years of that lets re-evaluate the results then we can decide if we want to disarm the whole country.
 @SeattleJoe  @TreeTopFlyer "what we need to do is keep guns out of the wrong hands." And what a great job we've done with that, right?
We've tried keeping the guns out of the wrong hands and have been woefully ineffective. Furthermore, guns in the "right" hands get stolen (witness Newtown).
At this point the best solution is to bad guns OUTRIGHT. As a society we've proven we can not handle guns safely. Period. Time to try a new approach.
Â
I do realize, however, that a total ban is not going to work in the US. But it's a starting point.
 @DrugFighter  @TreeTopFlyer Who limited this to carrying a gun around? Not me. Why should granny not have a gun in her house? Someone breaks in she can hold up a pistol and say get out or I'll shoot. That is a life potentially saved vs potentially lost. But how about this. Just think basically any disadvantaged person (smaller woman, disabled, even small guy) who is threatened by some thug with a tire iron. Do you expect any of them to be able to defend their life without a firearm? Not likely.Â
As for Mexico, the cartels have a lot to do with the crime for sure. But a populace that has no defense is also what enables a lot of the killing to go unabated. I'm not saying its perfect but it would be better if they could defend themselves. Â But as for America, the number of guns has been going up steadily and the number of violent crimes has been going down. If it were true that more guns = more crime (and hence less guns = less crime) then this wouldn't be the case. What we have are a lot of drug/gang crimes driving up the numbers but America as a whole is a pretty safe place to be. No need to ban guns etc, what we need to do is keep guns out of the wrong hands.Â
 @SeattleJoe  @TreeTopFlyer You are truly clueless, Joe. Gun-toting grannies? Sure. That'll make the streets safer, when everyone carries guns around "for personal protection". You REALLY think that makes for a safer society, when EVERYONE carries guns? Guess you idea and mine differ greatly.
Â
Nice try, to call attention to Mexico on that chart. You KNOW that's because of the cartelwar they have down there. That skews the chart, but if you want to use that as evidence that guncontrol does not work... go right ahead. Anyone who hears that will see you for what you are. Just another NRA tool, regurgitating the partyline.
Gotta love the media. we wil now be treated to front page stories if anyone shoots anything or anyone near a theatre, in a theatre, or on the same street. the same with school shootings. Â
 @DT True. If it bleeds, it leads... Thats our media for us.
Where does it say the guns were illegal? Most domestic violence shootings are at the hand of a legal gun owner.
Yet, when there are more guns than people then it should not be hard to get a gun.Â
Â
Also restrictive gun laws do not mean less guns
 @snoopy84 Exactly ,, how will a ban on high capacity magazines stop guns from being sold, traded, stolen or willed to someone upon death in a family. Banning those mags only goes to prevent current owners from buying them. The gun is already there ,,, other wise its useless.
Gee, how is it possible that those two people had guns in a state with some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country? Oh yeah, because it didn't matter to them if there were laws! CRIMINALS DON'T CARE ABOUT LAWS!!!!
 @doxiemom2008 Liberal gun abolitionists dont care about anything other than complete banning of all firearms.Â
 @Snoop  @doxiemom2008 Hey, screw you I'm a liberal and I offered a solution. You responded with ignorance. I find your use of the word "Liberal" offensive, in that jerks such as yourself want to blame the great flood on anyone not as stupid as yourself. Have you ever, once in your life, actually thought something through? Have you ever gathered information on your own, by say, reading? One common trait among those who align themselves with Republicans and those who call themselves conservatives is their sheep like behavior. A bunch of Lemmings, the make believe ones that are said to stampede off of cliffs. They don't, it was made up. Like most of the information you have filed away.
 @uscit16791949  @Snoop  @doxiemom2008 I'll give you 100 points for the rant. Classic, irrational, non-factual, name calling liberal rant. I'm glad you think so highly of yourself. The funniest part:  "Have you ever, once in your life, actually thought something through?"  Considering your "Solution" its pretty clear you need to take your own advice very seriously.
 @uscit16791949 = liberal / liberal /liberal / liberal / liberal / liberal / liberal... thx's for allowing me to offend you today... go hawks..
Too. many. guns. Not enough responsible gun owners. I wish I could say all gun owners are responsible. But they are not. Looking forward to fair and sensible gun safety laws.Â
 @KH Too. Many. Periods. Of the 80+ million households with guns how many of those 80 million are being irresponsible? If the percentage were of any significant value we would be having crazy amounts of issues, but we are not. The vast majority of gun owners are doing fine. The problem is when every single incident is plastered over the "if it bleeds it leads" news it makes it look like its an epidemic.
 @KH Exactly right, the guns aren't the problem...uneducated / trained owners are.
How's that proliferation of guns in society workin for ya?Â
 @Citizen#3457899654 Matches the proliferation of stupid , idiotic mental midgets in society.
 @Snoop  @Citizen#3457899654 it may, but there is no correlation
 @Komo Dragon Really ,,, your saying there is no correlation between a emotional, disturbed spouse and the proliferation guns?
 @Citizen#3457899654 The cops fired, not the bad guy. How's that gun free zone workin' for ya?
Â
Oh, I get it. Cops are the only gun carriers that can fire in a crowded area. I bet they could never make a bad call because they're perfect...... that must work better for ya, eh mate?
 @komoispropaganda  @Citizen#3457899654 yeah, I'll take the cops with guns any day over your "armed janitors".... LOL....