Colorado Movie Theater Shooting

I'm curious what everyone thinks about the shooting that happened at the midnight premiere of The Dark Knight Rises in Aurora early on Friday.

I will confess to being pretty far right- wing on many subjects (and I tend to vote Republican because I tend to agree with small government). But on the issue of gun control, I'm as far left as it gets. I'd love to see America go the way of the UK.

I'm very curious to hear what everyone thinks, but I would especially like to hear what people from England (and other countries where guns are prohibited) think.

I'm pretty ignorant on the matter really and only really know the way i feel about it which is - while I am all about rights and having them/exercising them - why would anyone want to carry a gun around? In a war zone maybe but just to do it because you're allowed to? Ridiculous.

When I saw the John Lennon exhibit at the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame annex in NY, there was some statistic at the end right after you saw the blood stained bag with John's clothes in it....it was about the number of people that have been killed just since John in the USA by gun crime. It was staggering. I can't remember the number but it was HUGE.

Ban the guns! Less people will die!!!!! Yeah there are loons that will always get a gun no matter what the laws are but less people will be killed.

To lose your life is surely a greater violation of the most fundamental of human rights so come on and violate the right to bear arms.

PS not sure what people think of Michael Moore but Bowling for Columbine - what a film.

Thanks, Lucy. I'll be honest: I'm getting so tired of being pummeled on this issue that I wanted to discuss it here with what I would hoped would be more liberal-minded people. I agree with you 100%. I so wish they would ban them here, but realistically, it'll never happen.

I did see Bowling for Columbine. It was good, but I take it with a grain of salt just because it is Michael Moore and I don't like how much he tends to distort things sometimes.

The scary thing is that guy had booby traps in his apartment. Explosive ones.

I know. He's obviously crazy.

The Movie Massacre Man is SERIOUSLY mentally ill and his untreated illness cost 12 people their lives; many more were injured and look at how this affected EVERY LIVING PERSON.

As far as gun control, I will say that I am 100% in favor of it and wish guns would be discontinued. That is just one person's opinion and I am willing to listen to other points of view and learn where others sit on this issue and why. I will say that I am 100% against guns and it is unfortunate that an atrocity of THIS MAGNITUDE is often what it takes to drive the case against guns home.

Well, handguns are illegal in the city I live in, but that doesn't stop people from getting them, it seems. But yeah, on the whole I am way way way pro-gun control, I just don't understand why people even WANT to own guns. I wouldn't feel safe with one in the house. But every time there's a shooting in town, the newspaper comments are full of "That's why we should be able to have concealed carry here!!!!!" comments, so I think the reality of having them banned in any kind of effective way is very unlikely. Unfortunately.

To be honest, this is one reason I don't identify with any political party necessarily (though I lean pretty liberal in general)...it's like the "hard-cores" of either side want you to agree with EVERYTHING on "their" side or you're not really "one of them"....I think we should prize people who think for themselves on individual issues and not just toe the party line.

My husband has shot guns locked up in a gun case for hunting.I saw them once.I'm on the line for gun control.Banning them just isn't gonna work cause people will find a way to get them no matter what.Just like drugs,their illegal but people use them.You wonder when that guy walked in the theatre what would've happened if just 5 or 6 people had a hand gun on them what would of happened,would less people would have been killed or hurt?Would he have thought twice about doing this?

Why are all mass murderers men?When was the last time you'd seen a woman do this?Just wondering......

I really think that, if you look at the countries where guns are illegal and their statistics, prohibiting guns works. It doesn't completely eradicate them and you'd be crazy if you think that it would, but it dramatically cuts down homicides by firearms. You brought up drugs, which leads me to ask: given our nation's logic on firearms, why don't we just legalize all drugs? If our gun stance is "well, people are just going to get them anyways, so don't restrict it", well, then do the same for drugs!
The other thing I don't get about the Right in America (and I tend to the right) is this: how can you be pro-life and be pro-gun at the same time? Isn't that an oxy-moron?

There are some interesting things to consider about the gun control issue. I'm still reading up on both sides because I can see both points of view.

From personal experience, I can remember one time it was a good thing my Dad had a gun. This was in the 1970's. A neighbor experienced an intruder in her home and called out for help. My Dad responded (he was armed) and saved her life.

There are other reasons which give me pause when folks speak of gun control. For instance, in riots. My Grandma was caught up in the riots in LA many years ago. My Dad's only way to get her out and to safety was to be armed.

As the gap between the nations poor and the nations wealthy increases, and nothing is done to change this... we can expect increasing civil unrest. I don't think a revolution is out of the question within our lifetimes. The government already has not cared about the nation's poor for decades upon decades. Look at all the elderly- even veterans- who eat pet food because they cannot afford a meal! It's nothing to be proud of, as a nation. It won't go on forever. Look at the Occupy Wall Street movement. That's peaceful and all good. But the longer people are hungry, they more wild things will get. It used to be the elderly who were hungry, and everyone said, "how sad," and ignored them. But as the young people go hungry... well, now they are getting vocal. If chaos breaks out.... counting on people's noble nature won't work.

I am 100% pro-gun control and I admit that I, too don't know why anybody would even want one. That asinine argument that "guns don't kill, people do" is asinine because guns were created with the idea of maiming and/or killing. True, a gun can't go up to an intended target and aim itself and shoot and has to be operated by a human agent, but again, it is a WEAPON and its purpose is to end life.

Erin makes a good point above - if somebody wants a gun badly enough, that person will find a way to get one. However, by prohibiting them, that step DOES significantly reduce homicides and serious gun related injuries.

Pro-life and pro-gun do seem to work at cross points with one another. It's like an anti-Semite claiming to love Jesus, who was Jewish.

Originally Posted by Rellevart

To be honest, this is one reason I don't identify with any political party necessarily (though I lean pretty liberal in general)...it's like the "hard-cores" of either side want you to agree with EVERYTHING on "their" side or you're not really "one of them"....I think we should prize people who think for themselves on individual issues and not just toe the party line.

Amen, Sister Rell! I have bitched and moaned since I was a very young child about the "agree with people to get in their good graces" syndrome. I have gotten on my soapbox many times about how I hate brown nosing and people who feel, as you said that they have to agree with EVERY damn point a given party or side gives. I admit that I am a democrat. I admit that I am pretty liberal for the most part. I also admit that I don't agree with EVERYTHING members of my political affiliation do or express; conversely I don't DISAGREE with everything members of other political affiliations do or express. I like discourse and not echo chambers. Nobody ever learned in an echo chamber and I learn from listening to other points of view.

Two thorns in my side when I was a child was that a) people tend to be nicer to you when they think you agree with them and b) voicing agreement to stave off a punishment just makes you feel weak and dishonest. REAL friends accept you, warts, farts, wrinkles, halitosis and all and you don't have to sidestep your true beliefs and keep your true opinions under wraps. REAL friends accept you and you don't have to fear conditional love and that the friendship is based on whether or not you agree. I hate false agreement with the heat of 1000 suns and I refuse to play the "I agree with you game" with anybody. I like my apples UNpolished and my shoes and boots shined, but NOT with the spit of some toady!

I hate sycophantic behavior with an Aries passion; you will NEVER find BeatleBangs1964 bowing and scraping and voicing insincere agreement with anybody! I do feel very passionately about this; I just cannot abide a toady. I also don't like to see people knocking themselves out to gain the notice of someone they want to be liked by or admire.

"Everybody loves having people agree with them, but nobody likes or has any respect for a toady." -- BeatleBangs, 2011

The sad thing is- John was killed, and we can speculate he may still be here if America had certain gun control laws.

George was recovering from his cancer when his attack happened in England. Had George had a gun (did he not because of convictions- or England's gun control laws? I don't know), he would likely still be here. And I'm not suggesting he would have had to kill the intruder. He could have used it purely defensively as the situation unfolded.

I can understand how people can be pro-gun and pro-life. A baby is innocent. An intruder like George's.... not so much.

I was thinking the same thing, HC.

Good points, HC. You do present the logic on both sides. Luckily Olivia had that lamp to brain the intruder. Maybe not a gun, but use some weapon to defend yourself and keep the foe at bay without causing death or permanent injury.

As for the weirdo who attacked George, I think a lifetime in a secure facility is just the place for him and a fitting punishment.

The problem is that nobody differentiates...owning a basic gun for protection is one thing; owning a half-dozen weapons that are essentially military-grade is another. The Second Amendment (the key word "amendment" always being overlooked--it wasn't in the original Constitution) was written in a very different time, when guns were capable of very different damage.

Originally Posted by ringo_rama

The problem is that nobody differentiates...owning a basic gun for protection is one thing; owning a half-dozen weapons that are essentially military-grade is another. The Second Amendment (the key word "amendment" always being overlooked--it wasn't in the original Constitution) was written in a very different time, when guns were capable of very different damage.

Wow, we agree on a political issue!

Anyway, Erin, to answer your question, guns are not prohibited in other countries, just better regulated. Which is what we need. I read in the NYT the other day that ever since the assault weapons ban expired in 2004, the semi-automatic rifle that this loony used is now one of the best-selling in the US. WTF?! Why are people able to legally purchase weapons that only a soldier should have? And why can they buy so much ammunition... and all of it so easily? Makes no sense.

I heard a sad statistic on NPR the other day. Apparently, the majority of NRA members are in favor of many of the common sense gun control regulations, but their leadership just ignores them and pressures both political parties to lay off any regulation. Honestly, I don't think I'll ever understand that position... and I've tried. If people believe they have an absolute right to own as big an arsenal as they want, why does that right trump the safety of the general public?

After John died, I got involved in the gun control movement. I had a bumper sticker on my car and some people would say the most violent things as they drove past... and I was just a teenager!

Thanks for everyone's responses and discussion. Maia, you are so right about it not being prohibited in other countries, just better regulated. I didn't realize that until I was doing some research yesterday into the gun laws in the UK and when all of that went down. I think with the rhetoric being the way it is in this country, I assumed guns were outlawed completely there.

For the life of me, I absolutely cannot understand why civilians need automatic rifles, or any other military style weapons. And beyond that (amd maybe my ignorance is hanging out all over the place again), the 2nd amendment states "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Ok, so to me that says the the 2nd amendment is crazy outdated, cause I'm pretty sure the federal government wouldn't respond well to militias or insurrections nowadays. We now have armed forces that are obviously now the force that is "necessary to the security of the State." To me, the 2nd amendment says our armed forces and perhaps our law enforcement officials have the right to bear arms. I understand that precendent is also laid down in terms of how our Supreme Court has interpreted the 2nd amendment through subsequent court cases, but I don't understand how the 2nd amendment, in its state says I, as a civilian, can carry a firearm.

Originally Posted by Maia 66

Wow, we agree on a political issue!

Just because I'm always right doesn't mean I always go to the right.

Originally Posted by erinluv182

I think with the rhetoric being the way it is in this country, I assumed guns were outlawed completely there.

Well, you said you lean far right... so I hope you're not getting your "news" from Fox. You'll find a boatload of misinfo there... but I digress.

Originally Posted by erinluv182

cause I'm pretty sure the federal government wouldn't respond well to militias or insurrections nowadays. We now have armed forces that are obviously now the force that is "necessary to the security of the State." To me, the 2nd amendment says our armed forces and perhaps our law enforcement officials have the right to bear arms.

Remember that the 2nd Amendment was written by people who had first-hand experience with being forced to quarter British soldiers who were in our country enforcing The Intolerable Acts by a mad King 3,000 miles away. Revolution was in the air. Militias were needed to fight off the oppressors. Some people just have never moved on from that mentality... the fear of their own government--a government of the people, by the people... well, you know the rest. Ugh. It's just astonishing to me that gun sales soared as soon as Obama was elected.

I agree with you 100% that the 2nd Amendment is outdated, because our government does provide us with security and protection... but, unfortunately, as you have pointed out, our Supreme Court hasn't always agreed with us on that point.