Guns & Ammo Network


Collapse bottom bar
Subscribe

Addressing the Aurora Shooting Tragedy

by James Tarr   |  July 20th, 2012 91

My editor has asked me to weigh in on the shooting at the Batman premiere.  In case you haven’t heard about this, James Holmes walked into a crowded midnight showing of Batman and opened fire, and at least 12 people are dead.

I was asked to give my opinion on this, because my editor predicted, “The left will blame guns, and the right will blame violent movies and video games…crazy trumps it all.”

My perspective on this crime will not be popular with some:  There’s nothing that could have been done to prevent it.

In modern America we always want to second-guess everything, and throw blame around like confetti.  We also seem to have this crazy idea that certain circumstances could have been prevented, “if only….”—but that is both immature and irrational.  Let me repeat—there’s nothing that could have been done to prevent it, and the only person to blame is James Holmes.

CNN’s Piers Morgan has already called for more gun control. That’s great…I’d been worried he was out of ideas on how to lower his ratings even more.  And I’m glad to see he’s breaking new ground; how often do Brits call for gun control? Morgan works for CNN, a network that has lost most of its audience over the last fifteen years, specifically because of its unrelenting left-wing bias.

James Holmes, the perpetrator, reportedly had no criminal record other than a traffic ticket, and no history of mental illness.  There would be no legal way to prevent him from owning a gun except an outright ban on privately owned guns.

Aurora shooting suspect James Holmes posted this image on AdultfriendFinder.com July 5, 2012. Reportedly he used the phrase "Will you visit me in prison" in his profile. Image courtesy of AdultfriendFinder.com.

Let’s, for a second, assume that guns are the problem, and banning them would have prevented this.  Gee, where do I start?  First, the ban would have had to go into effect decades ago to get all the guns off the street, and guess what—you’ll never get all the guns out of the hands of private citizens in this country, not even if you enacted a total ban and sent the cops/military door to door.  Personally, I think we’re in the middle of a cultural civil war, and attempting to forcibly confiscate everybody’s guns would kick-start this cultural cold war into a shooting war, but that’s another blog.

Second, the gun banners seem to think that once all guns are banned, people would behave.  I’m a little fuzzy on my history there—is it true that no human was ever murdered by another human until the invention of gunpowder?

If there were no guns available to him and he still decided to go on a killing spree, he could have used a knife, a baseball bat, a can of Progresso soup…..my point is that you can’t legislate against crazy, or homicidal.  We are all assuming this guy was crazy, but you know what happens when you assume.  Maybe he’s perfectly sane and rational, but believes the world is drastically overpopulated….I don’t know, and neither do you.

Sane people occasionally go nuts.  Some get better afterward, some don’t.  If you propose that we prevent anyone from ever owning a weapon, just in case they go nuts, for our own protection, George Orwell would like a few words with you.

Should we blame violent movies or video games for desensitizing our youth?  No.  Stop blaming objects or things.  People are responsible for their own actions.  I like violent movies and video games, and I’ve never felt the urge to go on a murderous rampage, much less actually done it.  Some people are crazy and homicidal, and some of the crazy homicidal people may like to watch action movies or play First Person Shooter video games.  There may be overlap, but there is no cause and effect.

What’s the premise of Batman itself?  A vigilante who takes care of criminals, because the cops can’t be everywhere.  Wait, what?  The cops can’t be everywhere?  That’s not what the news media tells me.

Sarcasm aside, I can’t think of any rational idea which, when implemented, would have prevented James Holmes from going into that theater and shooting people.  More laws?  I think the “don’t murder people” law is pretty clear, and he had no problems breaking that, so any lesser laws against carrying concealed weapons or whatever would be moot.  The only thing I can think of which would have cut short his rampage was if one or four of the moviegoers were armed and started shooting back.  People, however, would still be dead.

The media will bombard us with calls for gun control, and endless odysseys into the shooter’s childhood and the “why” of this event.  The why does not matter. The fact of the matter is that this is a senseless act of violence, that could not have been prevented, and the only thing or person to blame is James Holmes.  Mourn the dead, because the loss of even one person is a tragedy.

  • DUDE

    You hit nail right on the head. If we looked at the numbers people would see that more people are killed in by bricks than guns, we dont need a brick control law do we?

  • Wolvie

    Well done and well said, James.

    There are horrible people in this world who want to do horrible things to others. This is a fact…it has been a fact and will continue to be a fact for the history of mankind.

    The only 2 ways available for the rest of humanity is to deal with them after they have done their acts or deal with them during their acts. We have no ability in our current, non-minority-report civilization to effectively deal with them before something happens.

    Funny how the left isn't calling on a ban of flammable liquids given that he had them fashioned into bombs in his car and apartment. I guess if he instead bombed the theater, it would have been OK in the eyes of the progressives.

  • JMB

    Took my son and his friends to the range 20 yr. olds, My son has been there before his friends were newbies' They really enjoyed shooting. I asked them if that was more fun than xbox,one said yes the other would rather shoot people on xbox.I know he never will go postal, but if someone snaps, they snap. It is what it is. Loonies!

  • jeebus

    Well written n agree with all points. Over here in new zealand we have this thing about banning this, banning that but no law on banning people who are incappable up bring kids up in a happy family from breeding.

  • Sunshine State

    It's the fire power;high capacity clips et al.Equipment the general public does not (correctly) include in broad "hunt" and personal protection needs acceptance.

    Ruger No.1 Single Shots sure rare in these episodes.

    But that will not be the direction the argument goes.(calm down!)

    Applying existing laws will be the call.

  • john doe

    The best argument against handguns is that the US is the only developed country in the world without effective gun control, and also has the highest crime rates of all developed countries.

    Also, the argument that “criminals are going to get guns anyway” doesn’t hold water. Criminals in Britain don’t “get guns anyway”, which is why the few murders they have are done with knives instead.

    And the “protect against government tyranny” is equally bogus. If the US government wanted to oppress us, they have the best military and the most advanced weapons in the world. Guns in the hands of the public would not be a problem.

    • canuk

      Actually, there were 139 gun related deaths in the UK in 2009 alone. If criminals want guns, they l find away to get them. The gun is not the issue, and I agree, stop blaming the tool. This individual could have just as easily trapped the people inside the building and burned it to the ground. Or waited until the movie ended, and run people down with his car. The fact remains that when PEOPE decide to hurt others, they will use what ever means at their disposial.

    • Mr KnowItAll

      Actually, the UK has a much higher burglary and robbery rate than the US. It also has a much higher rate of assaults. The possibility of an armed homeowner discourages US criminals from entering occupied homes.

    • Dave

      Really! Ever talked to any former Viet Cong? Watch the news from Afganistan much?

    • WAKE UP and UNITE

      The Violent crime rate in the U.S. has been steadily going down. Why? Many law abiding citizens are carrying handguns. They are protecting themselves and their fellow law abiding citizens from criminals. As far as criminals getting guns anyway, look at drug cartels in Mexico. And to protect against government tyranny, the U.S. Federal government has been ignoring the constitution for years. They simply invent ways to get into wars to take our freedom away.The war on terror is really a war on our freedom. It has created a Authoritarian surveilance society. If you look at interment camps during WW2, Law abiding Japanese Americans had all their rights and freedoms taken away simply because they were born or had parents born in Japan. My friends THE U.S. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS ALREADY TYRANNICAL, OPPRESSIVE, and UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

    • Jeremy wilson

      They would sure as shit know we were there.

    • Rodger

      John Doe ? Rebels have fought for freedom throughout history.that's how this country was founded. If the US military was ordered to kill it's own people over Orwellian gun control they would not win nor fight because of a radical change in our constitution by a politically motivated mandate, You obviously dont understand the will to fight for freedom. Gun laws should be strict and effectively enforced as should our borders, but no laws can stop a diabolical person from planning such a crime or crawling through our fences. What if this maniac used the same motive to block all of the theater doors and burn the place down or gas eveyone wthout using a gun……???.. I hope you read this before you burn another American flag.

    • Alan_T

      Dream on John …… I won't wake you .

      ….. ( What ? …… You mean John's awake ? ! ! ! ! ! )

      John , you &^#$@%#$$@ lying , liberal , cretinous , hopolophobe …..go back to Troll Ville !

    • John T.

      Ladies and Gentlemen, Mr. John Doe is a troll. His post is the same 'sound bite' type of nonsense that you get from Bloomberg, Pelosi, Media Matters and the Huffington Post.
      We should be more like Europe? YEAH RIGHT!
      Same tired half-truths and distortions.
      Friends, you can't argue logic and truth with a bot. 'John Doe' won't listen to reason, because John Doe is a 'useful idiot'. John Doe didn't come here to discuss anything. He posted this garbage to get everyone stirred up. Many of the pro-gun readership here will post logical and thoughtful counter arguments, but you are casting pearls before swine.
      Maybe one day 'John Doe', whoever he/she may be, will have a revelation and see the light? Possible, but not likely. Some people, even when the truth is all around them, can't bring themselves to embrace it, ever.
      Well 'John Doe', you can carry your happy … over to Britain and live there, since England is the socialist Utopia that you've been looking to make America into. Just like those morons during the Cold War who spent so much energy trying to convince their fellow Americans that the Soviet Union REALLY was a workers paradise. Funny, not too many of them emigrated to the USSR, either. Have fun, comrade.

    • A Patriot

      The Military will enforce a tyrannical U.S. Government's policies? I can guarantee a majority of men and women will not carry out those orders. I sure as hell won't and I know badder mofos that will take the war to those fools on Capital Hill. Your argument holds no water and you just have to look at the Syrian people, they don't have shit to fight their government but they are still holding out after all these months. You also forget about the many Soldiers, Marines, Sailors and Airman that are out of the Military with expert knowledge in weapons, tactics and explosives. Shit will be 1000 times worse for the government than in Syria.

    • bill doe

      I'm sorry but but when I had been sworn in to the military I distinctly remember saying "I will support and defend the constitution of the United States," then the people in the government not the other way around.

    • NOT CRAZY HICK

      I think you are the only sane person in this site. Cheers

    • MMoran7122

      The argument here is that we have a right to arm ourselves….. If more responsible, sane members of society did so we would see a decrease in crime due to the fact that those willing to commit crimes would be scared of what the guy next to him is packing. Trained responsible civilians who refuse to be victims are the answer to these problems. All it takes is one well placed bullet to stop crazy people such as this man. Training is the key.

      • Al Brady

        Absolutely right! The psycho or criminal would have little success out in the public if a good percent of those citizens around him were armed and ready to end his criminal / murderous actions. Gun laws have CAUSED more murderous and criminal acts than they could ever prevent. How many armed robbers or sneak burglars would enter a home if they well knew those could likely be some of the last few mements of their lives? How many rapists would make the attempt if they knew that instead of their desire they could be Fing shot! An armed society is a polite society. It was the armed American citizen that won our independence from the professional armies of Europe. (That was a "bring your own musket" type event.) It was the militarized US civilian that saved Europes collective A from tyranny in two world wars. It was American civilians who donated their firearms that armed a defenceless England early in WWII. Gun laws accomplish two things. They take the stearing wheel on government out of the hands of the citizens and they leave the citizen a defenceless subject. Why do you suppose there has been such effort to disarm the US citizen?

  • Wolvie

    "The best argument against handguns is that the US is the only developed country in the world without effective gun control, and also has the highest crime rates of all developed countries."

    So, Switzerland isn't a developed country anymore? How about Sweden and Norway?

    But since our states are pretty much the size of entire countries elsewhere in the world…how about we take each state and compare their crime rates against their gun laws? Maybe then you can explain to me why the greatest amount of crime occurs in the places where the strictest gun laws are and are committed better than 90% of the time by persons prohibited from owning or possessing guns?

    "Also, the argument that "criminals are going to get guns anyway" doesn't hold water. Criminals in Britain don't "get guns anyway", which is why the few murders they have are done with knives instead."

    So, criminals in Britain don't get guns…yet criminals in Britain are committing gun crimes and killing people with guns…but they don't get guns… Oh, and a murder with a knife is OK but a murder with a gun isn't? Why aren't you guys outlawing knives?

    "And the "protect against government tyranny" is equally bogus. If the US government wanted to oppress us, they have the best military and the most advanced weapons in the world. Guns in the hands of the public would not be a problem."

    There are over 300,000,000 ( yes, 3 hundred million…not a typo…) legally owned guns in the United States. How many soldiers you got? How many soldiers would be willing to take up arms against their countrymen…their friends…their families?

    Foreign nations think twice when considering to invade a country with an armed populace. Not long ago in the 1940's, Japan wouldn't consider invading the United States because they stated, "There is a man with a rifle behind every blade of grass".

    Of course, one need only look at when a bunch of disgruntled, over taxed, under represented people finally got fed up and took their rifles against their own government which had the biggest military in the world. Here's a hint…we celebrate the event every July.

    Oh, need something a little more current? OK, Google "The Battle Of Athens – 1946". Just another little bit of history where the government continued doing illegal activity and the people had enough and took action.

    Of course, one could even look at more recent history…seems I remember a little event in Afganistan where the huge, well equipped, technologically superior Russians had a little bit of a problem with a bunch of poorly trained people with really old rifles.

    You want to know why the crime rate is so high? Look no further than your own mirror. The permissive, liberal agenda has been working to remove personal responsibility, ignoring all accountability and glorifying a morally bankrupt culture that idolizes thug-life, rewards broken families, demonizes success and fosters dependency.

    Oh, one final note…and something that the lamestream media just…forgot…to report…

    That theater…it was a gun-free zone. Yup, that's right…they had a posted no-guns-allowed policy. So once again, the law abiding people followed the rules and set themselves up as lambs to the slaughter. One has to wonder how things might have turned out if that sick piece of garbage was met with a volley of rounds instead of a volley of screams. Since the coward gave up so easily when the cops showed up…I think we know what the answer would be.

    • Steve

      Well said Wolvie! I hope you don't confuse admin with facts. We all know how libs hate facts to get in the way of their emotional and unsubstantiated diatribes!

      • Alan_T

        Amen Steve !

    • disabled and jewish

      someone finially made the point criminals target "gun free zones" I pupously avoid such areas and take no small amount of grief for it. If the time comes(i hope it nevers does), i would rather hire legal representation and fight a gun possesion charge than allow myself or my girls to become victims.

    • Alan_T

      Thanks Wolvie ….. I was really too tired to deal with that lying piece of human dreck !

    • Mike T

      Nice one Wolvie, just excellent. So well written. "You want to know why the crime rate is so high? Look no further than your own mirror. The permissive, liberal agenda has been working to remove personal responsibility, ignoring all accountability and glorifying a morally bankrupt culture that idolizes thug-life, rewards broken families, demonizes success and fosters dependency. " I may repost this on fb to my liberal "friends" !! Nice work

      Read more: http://www.handgunsmag.com/2012/07/20/addressing-…

    • Tony

      * clap clap clap* Couldn't have said it better WITH all the facts supporting your argument!

  • Dennis Mullins

    Over 40,000 Americans are killed every year, over 110 killed every day, by the greatest killing machine ever used by the greatest numbers of people ever licensed for its use. That's right the automobile. Despite the fact that we register every vehicle; require people to pass a competency test, monitor their use with ten's of thousands of law enforcement personnel, spend billions of dollars designing special roads for their use and installing safety devices in the vehicles and over all the roadways. Place hundred of thousands of signs telling us how to use them. People die; in the last century it has still resulted in the deaths of millions, injuries in the tens of millions, property damage cost in the billions.

    Where are the politicians and protesters? Where is the call for more control, or dare we even suggest bans and confiscation? How can a society that is hell-bent on gun control and gun bans remain so apathetic to the greatest menace to their fellow man?

    Every life taken by an act of violence is a tragedy and we should mourn the victims and pray for the families. Can we stop the acts of violence? No! Can we reduce them? Maybe, though I doubt it, but at what cost and at the loss of what freedoms?

    • Wolvie

      I remember when I was doing motorcycle training and, without a doubt, during the classroom portion, a student would say something about loud pipes saving lives or bright colors saving lives.

      It was then that I would inform them that every year, between 2,000 and 4,000 people hit freight trains…

      The worst case of domestic terrorism involved the use of fertilizer and diesel fuel. Are we outlawing them?

      Strong-arm robberies are the choice of thugs when going after the elderly. Are we outlawing gyms? Perhaps we should start by taking the weight rooms out of the prisons.

      Knives…a huge and popular choice for the criminal. Not only don't the liberals try to outlaw those…but they have them unsecured, sitting on the kitchen counter. Try that with a gun.

      This particular animal had been planning this for months. Early reports show indicate that he actually used school resources to get the chemicals he needed for his bombs. Are we now going to outlaw schools?

      As I stated before…there is no effective way to stop a madman before he does his horrible act. We can only take action during the act or after the act. The liberals have done everything in their power to try and eliminate our ability to do anything during the act…and they continue to do everything to remove all repercussions after the act. Then they blame us when things happen.

  • Not Fair

    Another voice from New Zealand, where carrying guns is definitely prohibited. One can obtain a license for rifle and shotgun fairly easily – we have great shooting for game here. However, pistols for personal protection are banned, unless you are a gang member or drug dealer, of course, they all seem to have them! We have very restrictive rules about short arms, you must belong to a pistol club, only transport weapons to club events, and never, ever carry them in everyday life! Of course, the real test is, what would you do?

    You're sitting happily in the theatre, enjoying a bit of action and drama, when suddenly the door opens and shots are coming your way.

    If you live here, you die. Common sense doesn't come into it. If one person had fired back, maybe some of those lives would have been saved. Same with all the other mass shootings. These fiends pick their targets carefully. They haven't the guts to face an armed public.

    I enjoy my shooting at the range. But I am prevented by law from defending myself if such an attack should occur here. There have been mass shootings here in the past, usually among family members. All I can do is run away. This is not a good feeling.

    Can i express here my sorrow at the loss of so many people? I think things were better in the 19th Century. Damn the regulations.

  • Zak Richardson

    Hey John,

    I read your post about the Aurora shooting. You did indeed make some pretty valid points. I myself am from Denver, CO and I was one purchase ticket away from buying a movie ticket to the Century 16 Theater to see the premier of the Dark Knight Rises. Luckily their was a saint by my side when I called to ask if they had any more tickets for the midnight premier, I was in luck. I called my brother and asked him if he wanted to go (of course who would turn down the movie of the century) I then called back that theater and the woman replied they just gave away the last remaining tickets, and that was only 5 minutes. So we went to the 3:30am premier (I know nuts) and saw the DKR at the United Artist Theater. When I got out of the theater, my phone and facebook went off the hook. People asking me if I'm okay, and if I was involved in the shooting? Confuse as I was I went home (tired) and turned on the news and browsed the internet and there it was. 12 people dead at the midnight premier at the Aurora theater. I had chills down my spine when I saw the news and I couldn't imagine the horror that went on in that theater.

    It was racing through my mind, thinking "what if" we were there, "what if" we died. It really but a burden in my heart that these people died when they tried to escape reality and enjoy each others company whether it's family or friends and they can all laugh, cry, and scream together. It was all taken away from one man (I take that back, he isn't a man, he is a coward) for walking in the theater, heavily equipped and thinking it would gain him media attention and fame and for pleasure if he shoot up a theater. Disgusting, never have I been so disgusted with a man's action such as his and thinking he calls himself "the Joker". Pathetic.

    Earlier that day I also encounter a man with road rage who threatened me and had a baseball in his hands….a baseball. I thinking what would happen if he had a gun and my only defense is a lacrosse stick? The point of this is that I'm tired of being defenseless. I was never really into the whole owning a gun, I do have a shotgun for hunting and trap shooting from time to time, but what difference will it make to take every person in America's gun away? We'll still find a way to hurt and kill people, fuck when I was in Miami this guy ate a homeless man's face off, with nothing but his hands. It's time for protection, it's time to protect my life, my rights and whoever threatens anything that I love, especially the great people of Colorado. I know I have good sense and won't be an idiot and go crazy like "the Joker" did. All I need to know is what are the rules for a concealed weapon, which is the best firearm and how to be smart about it. Point me in the right direction James.

    RIP Victims of Aurora 7/20

    • James Tarr

      Zak–there is a famous saying that a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged. Coming to the realization that, when the chips are down, you are responsible for your own safety, is something many people just can't do. Hoping someone else will protect you is not a good plan. I carry a gun, and if I ever get into a conversation with non-gun people about it and they ask why, I just tell them it's a "fire extinguisher". I don't plan to start any fires, or go anywhere near any fires, but sometimes people get trapped in burning buildings, you know? My best advice for you is to check out several local gun shops and ask the employees about Colorado gun laws and CCW laws (trust me, you'll be one of hundreds of people doing that this week, and unless the employees are idiots they will welcome the chance to educate you). Every state has different CCW laws, and I will admit that I have no idea what Colorado's are. See if you can find a gun store with rental guns, and when you find one that fits your hand, rent it and put a box of ammo through it. The gun you like, and can shoot, is the best one to have with you. Personally I think semi-autos are easier to shoot fast and accurately than revolvers, but check it out for yourself.

    • Goodfella

      Hi Zak! The rules for a concealed semi-auto handgun are; (1) Use a pocket holster (or the gun will work a hole in your pocket. (2) Always assume the gun is loaded, and make sure it is! (3) Keep an extra magazine in your other pocket. (4) Don't pull the gun out unless your life or the life of another is threatened, and be prepared to use the gun. (5) Don't try to conceal and carry the gun through a metal detector. (6) Avoid the TSA.

  • Leon

    I agree totally,some people are just plain crazy.1 mistake.Batman is not a vigilante.He catches the criminals and turns them over to the authorities.He did not punish them.Still just a fictional character.If this guy did not have guns he might of made a homemade bomb.That might of killed and injured even more people.

    • Alan_T

      No offense Leon , but I think you need to look up the word " vigilante " in the dictionary . Actually , Batman is a vigilante …… but that is not neccesarily a bad thing .

      • Guest

        Your right Alan, just depends on circumstances if it's good or bad

    • james

      I recall that Batman and Robin were deputized by the Gotham City PD with the
      blessings of Comm. Gordon.

  • Leslie

    Very well written and I fully support the content of your response in every detail.
    As we all know, it's not the gun or the lack of more gun restricting or even banning laws, but it's only the individual person, including some police officers, carrying that gun and pulling the trigger to kill innocent people for no valid reason.

  • Scott

    These multi millionaire politicians, actors and media moguls like President Obama, Mayor Bloomberg and Pierce Morgan just to name a few, have bodyguards, drive in armored cars and live in fortresses and think that we'll all be safe if guns are banned. They see the world from a whole different perspective.

    Personally, I hope common sense prevails over this new frenzy to ban guns, severely restrict the second amendment and give criminals free reign over the innocent.

    I'm pretty sure I know what Obama will say and do if he's re-elected. But I'm very interested to hear what Mitt Romney will have to say about reinstating the gun ban after this tragic shooting. In 1994 he supported the Brady Bill and in 2004 he instituted a permanent ban on assault rifles in Massachusetts. C'mon Mitt…Don't let us down!!!

    • Scott

      One more thing…

      James Holmes had several explosives rigged to kill people at his apartment. If he didn't have access to guns, I'm sure he still would've killed, and maybe killed many many more than he did.

      There's no way to defend against a suicide bomber or a Timothy McVeigh who killed 168 people in Oklahoma with a truck bomb. However, the 2nd amendment makes it possible to defend against a lunatic madman shooting a gun. But making public places "No Gun Zones" defeats any defense whatsoever.

      Given a choice, I'd rather take my chances against a maniac with a gun than a maniac with a bomb.
      James Holmes had bombs, thank God he didn't use them at the theater. It could have been so much worse.

      • Scott

        Let's take this one step further…

        Theaters and other places that don't allow guns (No Gun Zones) should be held liable when things like this happen! Because they prevent patrons from being armed and being able to protect themselves.

        In his speach the morning after the shooting, President Obama wondered what would have happened if his kids were in the theater? That's easy. The Secret Service would have put the guy down and it would've been over just like that.

        Responsible citizens that legally carry concealed will go above and beyond to protect everyone around them if given the oportunity.

    • ffarquar

      He already let you down twice. You going to be suckered a third time?

      • Scott

        We have no other choice. Obama has absolutely gotta go…

  • Andrew

    I agree with most of the article except "I can’t think of any rational idea which, when implemented, would have prevented James Holmes from going into that theater and shooting people". From an outsiders perspective ( Australian handgun owner / shooter ) the US has past the point of gun / weapons legislation having any real effect in reducing crime / violence. But there must be ways to protect the public from this type of thing and a calm investigation of what happened before and after the shooting should come up with some ideas. You guys did it after 911 and the school / university shootings so I hope it happens in this case.

    • Wolvie

      I don't totally agree, Andrew.

      Nothing was done in the aftermath of the school shooting that have had any impact on it happening again. The only reason we haven't seen another 911 is not because of government protection…it is because people stood up and took responsibility for their own safety. The underwear bomber, the shoe bomber and an assorted cast of other crazies were taken down by people in the aisles just like on Flight 93.

      So, I totally agree with the quote, "I can’t think of any rational idea which, when implemented, would have prevented James Holmes from going into that theater and shooting people". On the other hand…I can easily point out the obvious fact that this theater was a posted and enforced "No Gun Zone". So, if I strip you of your weapons and lock you in a room with an armed lunatic…who is to blame? The lunatic? Yeah, he takes some blame. But I take a good amount of it because I caused the situation.

      Insane madmen cannot be effectively dealt with beforehand. We can only react during or after their acts.

      • Andrew

        Wolvie I agree you can't stop evil or mental ill people from planning/attempting acts of violence. But there are always simple steps that can be taken to make it harder for them to act or reduce their impact. I personally believe the introduction of cockpit security doors after 911 has had a major impact on safety in the air. Don't forget the underwear and shoe bombers were only taken down by passengers after their attempt to blowup the aircraft failed. They were forced to use less effective methods of terrorism after the increase in air travel security. In this case a "No Gun Zone" wasn't ever going to be effective unless it is enforced like it is in an airport environment. Would your society be happy with airport grade security in all public locations, I guess not I know I wouldn't like it. But to give up and say "I can’t think of any rational idea" except for "if one or four of the moviegoers were armed and started shooting back" and not search for other ideas to improve safety in public situations isn't the answer either.

        • Wolvie

          Nope, I can say I totally disagree this time.

          Those devices might have "failed", but that isn't to say they had no chance of working. The shoe bomber especially had a problem lighting the fuse…not with the explosive itself. And locking the cockpit door only works as a deterrent BECAUSE it is now expected that the passengers will not allow a terrorist the time needed to bust it down. Considering the strength of the door and it's frame has less strength than your front door (and we all know how easily those can be kicked in), the security is more of denying immediate access rather than pretending it's a bank vault.

          But you know what actually does have merit as a deterrent? The fact that Air Marshals are not in uniform but in plain clothes. Ironic that the left seems to think that having a law enforcement officer with a gun, who is disgusted as a civilian, can help stop crime, but a civilian with a hidden gun…oh, that can't possibly work.

          You are responsible for your own safety. I will neither accept or comply with further restrictions on my freedoms in "the interest of public safety". Sorry, but that is, and always will be, unacceptable.

          The police were on scene there in literally 3 minutes when the battery of 911 calls came in. They did their job as best they could, and I honestly can't think of something they could have done better that would have saved lives…let alone prevented this.

          No gun zones…failed.

          No brandishing of firearms…failed.

          Making murder against the law…failed.

          Making assault against the law…failed.

          Prohibiting the making, possessing or use of explosive devices…failed.

          How many more "laws", "restrictions" and "rules" do you propose we implement before the realization hits that criminals aren't going to follow the rules. Because, you know, they're criminals…

          A sick, criminal mind only understands one thing…force. The application of force (and even just the threat of force) is the ONLY thing that will turn the tide on a situation. The very thought that they can be reasoned with is almost as insane and offensive as the thought that we need to succumb to less freedoms because there are sick people out there.

          • Alan_T

            Double Amen Wolvie ! !

          • james

            The Unabomber, "Ted" Kaczynski engaged in a mail bombing campaign that spanned nearly 20 years, killing three people and injuring 23 others.

            He ignored the laws about building and sending bombs in the mail.

      • Alan_T

        Amen Wolvie !

    • James Tarr

      Andrew–you can't stop people from going nuts, or turning evil (the two are not necessarily the same thing), and if that person wants to hurt other people, they will find a way to do it. They only thing you can affect is how successful they are. There is one country which repeatedly suffered attacks like this, and they implemented the only policy which so reduced the effects of these attack that they are now pretty much a thing of the past. The country? Israel. The attacks? Terrorists showing up in malls or other public places with guns and going on shooting rampages. The policy which worked? Arming everybody. The U.S. press never talked about it, but over and over and over again a terrorist would show up in Israel with a pistol or AK and start shooting, and before they fired half a dozen rounds they would be gunned down by bystanders. After a while, because ths tactic provided so little return, the terrorists pretty much abandoned it and just went back to bombs….

      • Andrew

        James I agree you can look at Israel but they didn't JUST arm everybody. Their citizens are also part of the armed forces and receive training on dealing with these types of situations. I think this is a good idea, maybe American military personal should be required to carry a gun in public. Israel also has expensive and extensive security forces that pro-actively take out anyone they see as being a problem. Their society is covered by a total package of reactive public security measures implemented and controlled by their government.

        • james

          That would have been a life saver at Fort Hood.

      • Alan_T

        Amen James !

  • Jeff

    So true. The guns were merely tools used to create his carnage. It isn't legal to have an apartment full of explosives to kill first responders either, but he did have them. On September 11, evil men took over airplanes and flew them into buildings, killing a lot of Americans. As far as I know, airplanes were not placed on an illegal list, no one called for airplane control. Evil people will always exist and find ways to enact their carnage on other innocent people. It is sad, especially for all the innocent victims and their friends and families.

    • Alan_T

      Amen Jeff !

  • Mike

    Gasoline poured down the isle and ignited would have been
    more devistating but the Left wouldn't call for a ban on gasoline! These Nuts will find a way to push their agenda regardless of any laws against it.

  • Tommy

    A Molotov cocktail would have killed EVERYONE in the theater, do we outlaw bottles, rags and gasoline now. The 71 yr. old man in Florida took out TWO PERPS BY HIMSELF on Weds., did you happen to catch the video on TV before they BURIED FOREVER? The video of people crying outside the tragic shooting in Colorado, will play NON STOP for months. Because it fits their agenda.

  • Guest

    Cigarettes and alcohol kill hundreds of thousands of people EVERY YEAR. If they were really concerned about saving lives and not pushing for more control, they would ban them both immediately. In stead they blame guns, when we all know that guns don't kill people, stupid MFers do…

  • http://www.facebook.com/eric.d.crane Eric Douglas Crane

    I'm glad he didn't use a few Molotov cocktails. A backpack full of those would have ended even worse than the guns.

  • Guest

    The statement "I only carry a gun, because I can not carry a cop" comes to mind. I personally would rather have a well trained and motivated "good guy" in my corner than rely on my own devices, but that is not going to happen in this country. In our society there is evil and it must be met with force to stop it, if I have to be part of that force, so be it. Did anyone notice that the "Joker" surrendered peacefully to law enforcement as soon as they pointed guns at him? What if a "good guy citizen" had shot back or even pointed a gun his way and yelled "drop the weapon" ?? I know people would have still died, but one life saved or spared from pain and injury would have been worth the risk.

  • Mark McKinney

    Ok, here we go again. Elections coming up. Big issue with the UN on gun control. Major tragedy, something must be done. The Manchurian Candidate scenario again. Well at least it's as close to thought as just a lone crazy gunman. I'm so sick of politics. It's really time for a revolution again. Sad but so true.

  • Nathan

    I'm not a big gun enthusiast by any means but I firmly believe in ones self-defense and the simple fact remains that if somebody in that theater had been armed with a concealed weapon there most likely would have been a smaller or zero amount of life lost. This is coming from someone who doesn't much care for the conservative agenda and fully supports the union I belong to. What I have said isn't an opinion, its simply a fact of life. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people and a shot was never fired.

  • T.D. Honeycutt

    What has been missing from the coverage of Century 16 is the lack of security there. Immediately afterwards, NYPD increased security at 40 theaters in New York, to address the risk of copycats. Were there copycats? Not that I know, but we don't know if the extra security stopped some nutcase from mimicking Holmes. My point? A visible security presence there might have encouraged Holmes to go home, or to a coffee shop, or even stopped him in the middle of killing 12 people. That's probably the only rational thing you didn't discuss.

    • James Tarr

      T.D.–this guy was motivated and determined. If the place had security, armed or not, he would have gone somewhere else, or upped his game (shoot the guard walking in the door and then chucked molotov cocktails down the aisles before opening fire). There is no perfect security, and nobody wants to live in a police state, so the only thing that can be done is to allow those people who wish to defend themselves to carry guns–handguns are the most effective, efficient means possible of self-defense.

    • Wolvie

      How do we know that he didn't try for a different place but noticed something like enhanced security, police presence or 200 Hells Angels Harley's parked out front…so he went for a softer target?

      For a guy that had so much planning and preparation…there didn't seem to be anything special he did at the theater other than just walk in a back door.

      So I doubt that a guy planning mass murder for months would just go home or to a coffee shop in the face of hardened defenses. No, I'm of the opinion that he would just seek out a softer target…and that is exactly what might have happened in this case.

      • Alan_T

        Wolvie …….. this is not intended to be a joke .

        The first thought I had when I initially saw the news about this tragedy in Colorado , was that your Lil' Buddy , Jeepers Creepers went on a spree .

        • Wolvie

          Ah, the minute I heard, "no criminal history" and, "legally purchased firearms", I knew that couldn't be the case.

  • Baxter

    Presidents Bush 2 and Obama both signed the laws permitting arbitrary, indefinite incarceration of any person in the US without any legal recourse, representation, or even notification to your family. No day in court, legal recourse, speedy trial, none of that, citizen or not. If this does not deter the crazies maybe gun control is a bit of a fantasy.
    I think the Aurora guy was a crazy coward covered in body armor. One 22 headed his way would have scared him enough to change his behavior. We'll never know. Just very sad and should not be political fodder.

  • photojoe

    If simply killing the maximum number of humans was the objective, some poison gas in the air conditioning system would have killed everyone in the theater. False flag shootings are done to swing public opinion for more gun control laws. Gun free zones are actually "free fire" zones. Mass shootings always occur where there are no armed citizens available to return fire. What is the definition of a criminal? Someone that does not obey the laws. If a criminal wants a firearm, he can easily mug a cop or break into a LEO's home where there are almost always many guns and usually sub-machine guns.

  • THC

    He could have just as easily driven his car down a crowded pedestrian street killing and injuring just as many people so do we ban cars? How about a fertilizer and heating oil bomb for which he found plans on the internet, so do we ban everything that can be used to harm including the internet? It's just not rational to think that banning guns would have avoided some horrific event from this very sick individual.

  • Ron

    Good article, although we have to repeat those things all the time. For one, everyone is different. A weak mind "can" be influenced by violent, gory movies, and bullies. If Films did not "influence", then why do they have TV Commercials, to influence us ? 2. Believe it or not, even with bullets flying, I can't understand a Theater full of Men, that would not try to at least crawl around behind him, do something, tackle him, punch him, whatever was possible. I know many "neighborhood guys" that would have either thought of that, or tried to do that. Particularly Military Veterans, trained to get their attackers, not run. Probably none of those in the Theater. Just average folks. This may be like the 911 Hijackings. After the first plane crashes, people realize they have nothing to lose, and fight back, the next time.

  • Jeepers Creepers

    There is nothing any body could have done with this guy. He must of known about Colorado love for firearms. He was prepared for that. He came in fast and hard so no one could get a shot off that could of stopped him. I guess he did miss the no firearms in Theater posted on the front door. He also wanted to kill the police that went to his apartment. Since I have been mugged twice at gun point. Has a victim of such a crime I have been a CCW permit holder for a long time and have trained extensively over the years. If I could carry in the theater I doubt that I would have tried to stop this nut until he started out the door. At that point his 5.56 jammed, the Glock and 12 gauge were out of ammo.
    "Wolvie I get so Hot when you talk dirty to me." You really turn me on.

    • Pete

      Creepers STFU you devient idiot !

  • Pete

    This assault weapon ban issue will pop to the surface with Obama deciding to show his real colors and call for its implementation now, forcing Romney to choose a side. If he supports keeping assault weapon laws the way they are, some of the undecided, especially in the swing state of Colorado might go Obama's way. That could happen in the other states, and puch him over the top, dodging the economy again. Someone will say "If those Republicans kept the Assault Weapons Ban instituted by Democratic Clinton, the shooter would not have been able to purchase his most deadly gun, and surely more than half would be saved". "More if the handgun could only use 10 round clips". Its gonna get scary, because if Obama wins, we don't have a chance!

    • Michael

      I heard Mobama state that no one needs an AK-47 on the news today. Which is probably true. They are cheap enough that anyone can afford one, and as long as his target is less than 200 yards away he just might hit it. Had way to many encounters with them in Nam. This piece of s–t in Colo. didn't know enough to use the tube of Graphite or he had one of the knock-offs

  • Mr. Reed

    Well said Pete

  • Michael Coffee

    Come on people!! All I want to hear about this piece of fecal matter is "Guilty in the first, the execution date, and the fact it was carried out……..

    • Wolvie

      I tend to agree with your sentiment, Michael…but sadly, that just isn't the issue.

      The senseless, terrorist attack on those people has become a podium for those who wish to lay the blame on us. Oh, you can be sure that there will be support for this animal from the left because they will claim he was crazy and wasn't responsible for his actions. Then, you can be equally sure that they will try and blame us, the type of gun, the capacity of the magazine and anything else that supports their agenda of total disarming of all civilians.

      Yes, this should be about those people who were gunned down in a sick, disgusting execution. For them, their families, the survivors and all else affected, I cannot begin to express my grief.

      But when these progressive/leftist/scum go and lend support for the perp who deserves no mercy, then tries to blame the law abiding public for his actions, I cannot begin to express my rage.

      • Michael

        Hey Wolvie, the fact the theater was a "no carry zone" tells me all I want to know about that establishment! They almost signed those peoples death warrant. I used the word "almost" in fear of legal retribution. Here in NM we can feel safe in our homes and automobiles because of the laws that allow carrying a loaded weapon is not against the LAW. But when I'm at home I'm covered by two, hundred pound + pure bred Wolves. They call me Lives With Wolves.

        • Wolvie

          You're a braver man than me, Michael.

          I think if I were to try that, my name would be, "Digested by Wolves"!

          • Michael

            Hi again Wovie, The answer is: I'm part of the pack. They treat me better than they treat one another, they seem to know I'm considerably more tender then they are. All and all one big happy family. Wouldn't trade them for their weight in gold. These animals have demonstrated qualities I wish I could attribute to most of the two legged critters I know.

  • Wolvie

    Well, there has been a lot of talk about how this event could have turned out differently if there had been someone armed in the theater who, theoretically, could have engaged the shooter and stopped this event from continuing.

    A lot of people (myself included) maintain that the best way to deal with an active shooter is to engage the animal until he ceases to be a threat.

    I've even stated, on several occasions here, that you can't do much to prevent a madman before he commits his horrible acts. I have stated that you can only deal with him during the act or deal with him after the act. I even went on to state that leftists/liberals/progressives have been doing everything to prevent us from being able to intervene during the act…and that they do everything in their power to lessen what happens to the perp after the act.

    So, are we all just full of it? Are we just pontificating about things and trying to sway opinion to what we want it to be? Are we speaking with just false bravado just to feel better about ourselves?

    Well, the truth is, we could absolutely be accused of that.

    You see, without solid proof…solid comparisons…and definitive information/proof, a lot of this is indeed just talk. What we need is to look at a similar event, in a similar place, but with the different variables that show the result would be as we say it will be.

    But where to find such information? Does it even exist? If it does exist, does the outcome support our points?

    Well, the answer is, "Yes".

    Same state, same town, same year (only a few months ago), same situation…different results:

    http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/04/22/2-shot-outs…
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/24/suspect-…

    A violent, convicted felon, out of jail (when he should be locked up), gets a gun (illegally…go figure) and heads out to a gathering of people for no reason. He crashes his car in the parking lot and then begins to shoot at the people. One, unarmed woman is killed before another person (this time an off-duty LEO) draws a gun from concealment and shoots the animal dead before he can do more damage.

    Same State: Check
    Same City: Check
    Same Year: Check
    Proof that bad guys choose what they think are soft targets: Check
    Proof that liberal courts put us in danger by letting violent people free: Check
    Proof that engaging a sick maniac during the act is an effective option: Check
    Same situation with different results because of a good guy with a concealed gun: Check

  • ARsrule

    You said everything that needed to be said and you are totally right on every point. I also agree with your accessment on the cultural civil war and how fast it might become much, much, more. I wondered to myself if the martin Zimmerman case might be the straw that started it all but that seems to have diffused for now. Just wondering what the spark might be and that leads me to the point that I feel I will need my guns and my ammo sometime before my time on this big blue orb is over (about 30 more years should do it if I am lucky!)
    We all need to live in that state of preparredness that cause many to think that we are "crazies." If it does happen they will be begging us for protection and we will decide if they deserve it or not, we'll get the last laugh after all won't we?

  • Charles Castellani

    While I do agree with your reasoning from our wanting to control everything in Life, and end up really "controlling" very little, I support personal ownership of firearms by qualified citizens. However, I believe any and all combat weapons (i.e., AK47's) et al ought to be of a restricted to those in our military versus personal protection; home use; hunting; etc. If one must fire such weapons, find a range/gun club where use of such weapons can be found in a controlled environment. The variable here which not one of us can "control" but perhaps can contain is a psychiatric/psychological one: "Looking at guns, looking at video games — that's starting from the wrong perspective. People who commit spree killings are usually suffering from severe mental disorders. The response, and the way to prevent future episodes, has to start with psychiatry, too." (David Brooks, A world of delusion, schizophrenia. NYT News Service Thursday, July 26, 2012),

    • Wolvie

      Sure Charles,

      While your at it…why not ban anything and everything that doesn't meet your view on what's really necessary.

      Let's start with:
      Fatty foods, alcohol, motorcycles, sports cars, video games, R-Rated movies, candy, books with themes we don't agree with, certain types of music, smart phones, computers, combat-style knives, homes with greater than 500 square foot per person, more than one vehicle per household…oh, I can keep naming things but I think the point is made.

      Fallacy Number 1: Combat Weapons
      What exactly is that, pray tell? Perhaps you have no idea the difference between a semi-automatic rifle and a fully automatic machine gun. While I can't fault you for being ignorant about that…I most certainly will fault you for trying to explain away a position that you have no credible knowledge about.

      Fallacy Number 2: I support "X"…but…
      This is the tried and true weapon of the liberal. They "claim" to support something but will then attempt to justify ridiculous restrictions in the same breath. Do everyone a favor and at least be honest about your intentions.

      Fallacy Number 3: Controlled Environment
      What exactly is a controlled environment? Hell, I think my home and my safes are a pretty good controlled place. You know, despite what you want people to believe, during the massacre…none of my guns felt kinship to the killer and loaded themselves and leapt from my safe or holster in solidarity.

      All a liberal wants is control. Firearms keep a liberal from gaining control. So a liberal will use their religion (the belief in the Government) to try and plant restrictions to gain control.

      Next time you want to blame someone…try telling a woman she's a potential prostitute or a man is a potential rapist because both have the equipment available to commit the crimes.

      • Wolvie

        Oh, and Charles…you're a day early. Everyone know that Friday is Liberal Troll Day.

        Please get with the program.

  • jerry allen

    As long as satan controls peoples hearts and minds these things will wax worse and worse.
    It's called sin and sin causes death and distruction.
    jesus said to repent and be saved thru his shead blood that was done at the cross for all who would accept him. In other words this is no mystery why people like this young man do these things. People skirt the issue with all the excuses in the world. With out a relationship with christ no one can win in the end.

  • Michael

    My friend, this world is a no-win situation any way you look at it. If a drunk doesn't run over you another will find a way to get the job done. I don't need a Bible thumping fool to tell me if I go to church and be a good man, all is well. I damed well know better. Was God in Aurora???

  • C.C.Q.31

    This event in Colorado movie theater will and can change gun ownership for a very long time. On July 20th the President set up a web site so the American people could choose what gun laws they do or do not want. The gun laws that were made in the Clinton Years that expired can be re-instated by the President without congress. the president wants to hear from both the Anti-gunners and the Pro gunners. The Anti's jumped at that and are ahead. I need votes on my counter petition to repeal all gun laws back to pre 1990 laws and enforce them. I need 25,000 votes before Aug 25th to counter the ANTI-Gunners. They have untill AUG 20th to get the needed 25,000 votes. The expired Clinton gun laws were already gun laws in the past lets keep them in the past.

  • Ephraim

    Nothing can prevent or predict psychotics.

    Likewise, nothing can predict or prevent innate heroism.
    http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/25/opinion/bennett-aur…

  • Jerry B.

    Actually there are a few things to be discussed. My wife tells me that other theaters had security guards on exits. He could not have jammed a back exit door, then gone out back and put on his bullet proof gear, and came back in well armed, at those theaters.

    Apparently it is more and more up to the consumer to check if where he or she is going at midnight is a safe place. If you have a choice then go where they have security. Go where there are no meaningless “no guns allowed” signs that only protect the (usually) understaffed establishment.

    Be weak and be a slave. Our revolutionary war was one of the first times an armed king lost control of “his” people. The French got jealous of our revolution and quickly had a revolution of their own. The British saw how messy the French revolution was and slowed it down in England, keeping their royalty on the payroll with less real authority.
    http://www.britishbattles.com/battle-cowpens.htm
    Freedom began happening a couple of hundred years ago. Because of people like Daniel Morgan at the Battle of Cowpens, and the new rifled muskets.

back to top