Suspect was former med student
Terrible tragedy! My condolences to all those who have lost loved ones.It is inevitable that this comment board will include more about gun control.
Efforts at gun control must focus on identifying individuals who are unstable,
then make sure they are not allowed access to weapons (not just guns, but all
weapons). Violent video games and other forms of violence portrayed in the media
are not benign to society. There are those few who are deeply influenced by
violence, and attempt to act out what they have witnessed time and time again
onscreen.I wonder if the movie theater had a sign posted on the
front doors stating that no concealed weapons are allowed inside? If that was
the case, (and I do not know), but if that was the case, . . . the policy only
restricted those who were law-abiding concealed carry holders, . . . law-abiding
individuals who could have ended this before it became a massacre.
Once again the NRA and gun nuts will spout their nonsense about not letting this
incident be a reason for reasonable gun control. EPJ, your condolences are not
enough. And your logic flawed. This mass slaughter will continue until this
foolish country wakes up to the stupidity of endorsing weapon control policies
advocated by the NRA and their gun loving sycophants.How many more
lives will be lost before we do something about controlling automatic and large
Epj.Your insightful.The video games are a major issue. But,
there's no way to control that industry.It seems that way at least.
Wow, epj. Did you just make a political statement out of this, even before the
smoke has cleared, so to speak. But okay, just to clarify, you blame the video
games. This is a tragedy, it's almost unthinkable that a young
man would do something like this. But it's all too common anymore. My heart
goes out to everyone and their families that were involved. Especially to the
children that were victims. How horrific. Expecting to go have a fun evening and
then for this to happen. Very sad.
Re: ". . . NRA . . . logic flawed."Yeah, here's the
logic anti-gun liberals are selling -- the solution to the slaughter of
powerless, unarmed innocents is to force us to have MORE powerless unarmed
EVERYONE- please show some discretion, put a hold on the accusations and
let's avoid the blame game until some real time has elapsed- time and
place, time and place....
@EPJ, MikeinCederCity, Aggielove, and procuradorfiscalCouldn't
be bothered to even wait 24 hours before making this political and blame-placing
"It was the worst mass shooting in Colorado since the Columbine High School
massacre on April 20, 1999. Students E.H., 18, and D.K, 17,"It
is irresponsible to print the name of mass murderers who did it, in part, for
glory and recognition.
What a horrible tragedy.My son attended the premiere last night, getting
home just after 3 am when the movie ended. My heart goes out to the
families of the victims..Re:RationalI think it might be
a good idea for the media to adopt a policy whereby they do not publicize the
perpetrators name or picture. Re:EPJIve never seen a sign
anywhere stating concealed weapons are not allowed.We should bring
back the Brady bill, an assault weapons ban, (like they have in MA) a waiting
period for gun purchases, and close the gun show loopholes etc.
The NRA can do their thing but my problem is with people like MItt Romney who
support them. I do not agree the reasoning that we should arm everyone. Too
many bad consequences. Case in point a two year old died recently from playing
with a loaded weapon.
I am sorry this happened.
So what you are saying is, people should have brought MORE guns to the movie
theater (where guns are prohibited.) The vigilante fantasy that the
Zimmerman's of the world seem to have about how they will be the hero one
day by taking down a gunman are ridiculous. Guns aren't to blame for this
tragedy, this guy is. But the guns helped. There's no reason that anyone
reasonably needs access to an assault rifle.________________________procuradorfiscalTooele, UTRe:
". . . NRA . . . logic flawed."Yeah, here's the logic
anti-gun liberals are selling -- the solution to the slaughter of powerless,
unarmed innocents is to force us to have MORE powerless unarmed innocents.Great logic.
Remember when batman just slugged it out with (funny looking) people who seemed
to want to rob banks? He's changed, like our culture. We worship violence a
lot more now.More and more this is how it manifests itself.
A similar situation happened in Utah several years ago at Trolley square. I got
my carry permit at the time as a result. I don't know if Colorado allows
conceiled carry of weapons, but I do believe that had either a police or a
citizen with a gun been in the theater at the time, many lives would have been
The National Rifle Association does not own the 2nd Amendment although they act
like they do. It belongs to all of us and the NRA does not speak for me.
I’ve been a gun owner since I was thirteen when my dad bought me a .22
rifle. I’m descended from Mormon settlers who came West in covered wagons
bringing their guns with them and they didn’t even have the NRA! How on
Earth did they do it?I’ll tell you how they did it. A gun was
a tool for them as much as a shovel, ax, or plow, something they used when
needed. It wasn’t a play toy, a status symbol, or something to twirl on
their fingers while fantasizing that they were Wyatt Earp.I’m
sick of the gun culture in today’s America. Know what? There’s
always been a gun culture in this country and it didn’t used to be
anything like it’s become in my time.
Murders happened long before guns were invented. Now that guns are here the only
difference is the choice of the weapon.Think that mass murders such
as this can't be carried out with old time technology? Better think again.
An assailant with either a knifeor a sword can kill a lot of people in a
short amount of time especially in a crowded place such as this theater and the
knife or sword doesn't run out of ammunition or emit a sound to warn others
to take cover, or to escape, or to take action against the assailant.
It's a shame that people lost their life and were seriously injured. There
needs to be more control on certin type of rifles sold and a longer wait time to
get them. I believe that people have rights to own and carry weapons when they
have the permit and a through back ground and a mental evaluation done. You
could have all the Law Enforcement Officers in the world and when you can't
see what is going on because of the smoke you can't defend the people. I
also believe that their were officer of the law there, they caught the person
too quick. This case doesn't need to be tried in the paper, but in a
courtroom where the defended gets a fair trial. Too many are quick to want to
place the NRA or viedo games at fault. I have noticed that since parents rights
to punish their children the way they see best was taken away by the system
their has been far too much volient crime of mass killing, by the younger people
of our country.
Theories as to why this happened so far...1. The guns2. The
video gamesMy guess - Anti-Depressant SRRIs meds.But for
right now, until the facts get in -- it's anybody's guess...
The five states with the lowest per capita gun death rates were Massachusetts,
Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut. Each of these states had a per
capita gun death rate far below the national per capita gun death rate of 10.19
per 100,000 for 2009. Each state has strong gun laws and low gun ownership
rates. By contrast, states with weak gun laws and higher rates of gun ownership
had far higher rates of firearm-related death. Ranking first in the nation for
gun death was Louisiana, followed by Wyoming, Alabama, Montana, and Mississippi.
On his 2002, gubernatorial campaign website, Romney declared his
support for "the strict enforcement of gun laws" as well as "the
federal assault weapons ban." In his 2003 budget, Romney
proposed tripling fees for gun owners to obtain ID cards for firearms and to
obtain a license to carry a firearm. Fees got quadrupled."I
believe the people should have the right to bear arms, but I don't believe
that we have to have assault weapons as part of our personal arsenal." Mitt
Romney then signed a bill outlawing assault weapons and small handguns in
how about outlawing killers? novel approach. where is the outrage of the antigun
libs when their own government is selling weapons to criminals?
Dr. David Hemenway, director of Harvard Injury Control Research Center noted in
his book, "The time Americans spend using their cars is orders of magnitudes
greater than the time spent using their guns. It is probable that per hour of
exposure, guns are far more dangerous. Moreover, we have lots of safety
regulations concerning the manufacture of motor vehicles; there are virtually no
safety regulations for firearms manufacture."Such an approach to
injury prevention has been applied to every product Americans come into contact
with every day, except guns. And as is the case with motor vehicles, regulation
could reduce deaths and injuries associated with firearms.Comprehensive regulation could include: minimum safety standards; bans on
certain types of firearms such as "junk guns" and military-style assault
weapons; limits on firepower; restrictions on gun possession by those convicted
of a violent misdemeanor; heightened restrictions on the carrying of loaded guns
in public; improved enforcement of current laws restricting gun possession by
persons with histories of domestic violence; more detailed and timely data
collection on gun production, sales, use in crime, involvement in injury and
death; and, public education about the extreme risks associated with exposure to
A down side of gun laws is that they add luster to gun ownership. Guns provide a
means to a feeling of personal empowerment. That helps drive the market for
firearms. A gun can make a weak man feel powerful, a timid man a bit bolder, and
a desperate soul a menace to his fellow man.New gun laws can’t
fix that. Intelligent legislation might help alleviate parts of the symptoms
here and there but the sickness runs much deeper than the reach of law.
Sad and tragic...obama was quick to take public and government employee credit
for the success of all U.S. businesses, is he willing to take responsibility for
all the murderers that use the same roads and have the same teachers. Somebody
tell obama and his supporters that there is an x-factor in success, and
it's not the government.
ATl134. No I could not wait. The BRA makes gun possession a political issue 24
hours day 7 days a Week 365 days a year, and they don't forget Leap Year.
Nothing ever gets done because the politicians we elect are too afraid of the
NRA and their scoring schemes. Look at Jim Mattheson's vote on the Holder
contempt issue. He was so afraid of the NRA and Utah gun nuts that he could not
vote to object to what was a clearly partisan action. We hear all
the condolences, but they will never be enough. We need action to limit access
to weapons that were designed to kill people. You can't always identify
criminal, terrorists, and crazies, but you can pass laws restriction possession
of weapons of mass destruction. And, that includes AK 47s and the like.
Re: "There's no reason that anyone reasonably needs access to an
assault rifle."That train left the station years ago.There are already millions of what liberals would disingenuously describe as
"assault rifles" in the hands of Americans. There is no possibility,
whatever, of removing them all from circulation.That means criminals
will, ALWAYS and FOREVER, have them.The only question open to debate
is whether we will be effectively and collectively disarmed, prevented from
defending ourselves against predation by criminals who will inevitably be armed
with "assault weapons."I [along with most Americans] vote
I would imagine with several people having concealed weapons shooting at each
other in the confusion would just bring more death.Concealed weapons in a
mass shooting like this isn't a solution, it's a bigger problem.
The AR-15 is not an assualt rifle. It is a semi-automatic rifle that is really
not good for much except to kill. Secondly, although the AR-15 itself is not an
assualt weapon it can become so in a short time through a trained gunsmith. The
AR-15 is the civilian made M-16 assualt rifle. If you have listened or watch
the news each of the guns used in this trajedy were purchased legally.
Statistics can be made to swing whichever way you want them to swing.I've owned an AR-15 and know its capacity. It is a beautiful weapon for
killing anything you want to. All of the states with strong gun control are
basically your liberal controlled states. I do agree though that no one really
needs to own a weapon that can be changed in a short time to a fully automatic
assualt weapon. However, the biggest problem is that guns do not kill in and of
themselves. Someone brought up that a child was killed because of a loaded
weapon. This is the parents fault not the gun. Someone has to load the weapon.
Gun control is not the answer in its entirity. I agree that certain weapons
should not be able to obtain over the market. The normal criminal will not be
able to get such a weapon. However, there are those who have access to any
weapon known to man that they can get their hands on.A suicide
bomber is just as difficult to stop as person who wants to go out and kill.
This appears to be a pre-mediated, well planned attack. The weapons were bought
at three different stores to throw off suspicion. I do believe that a data-base
of who buys a weapon and what weapons have been bought is a good idea. I also
believe that certain laws need to be enforced but are not. Carrying a concealed
weapon is no more the answer than controlling who has access. Some would like
just the police to have guns. Unfortunately, then the criminals and the police
have them. No one is protected. Hunting is still legal in this country and is
in some ways a way of life. You can't control something just
by laws themselves. Someone like this gentleman will always be there.
It is anyones guess as to why this happened but several have said this was an
aberration (Including the Gov of Colo) to which I agree.Gun control
laws would as some suggest would control spontaneous events. However, the
shooter was a smart & disturbed individual. In cases such as this; desire
trumps any attempt at prevention. What amazed me is how much cash
that violent media rakes in as reported on Entertainment Tonight. I
like how officials are trying to derail the court of public opinion. Until we
find out why he was dismissed from school, I think any speculation as to why
this happened is moot. What gets me is Geography. Columbine then
Our founding fathers did not want any weapons banned from citizens,They believed an armed citizenry was the final check and balance against a
tyrannical government.NO wonder the socialist, communist loving
left want to always ban weapons.They love big government
tyrannical micromanaging control over everyone and everything. and they always
use any opportunity to dis arm the citizens, so nothing can stop thier big
government utopia.We must stop having knee-jerk reactions to
traumatic and rare events, it serves no one.
What a tragedy, My heart goes out to the families of the victims.Once again no matter how you justify what happened I say no guns or weapons
for civil use! police and military officers only! this is not the 17th, 18th or
19th century! this is the 21st century! no guns, no permit, period! I'm
sick of hearing about how people justify having weapons, I used to hear from my
grandma "guns are carried by the devil" plain and simple.How
many tragedies do we need to see before we take action and remove weapons from
Re:the truth"Our founding fathers did not want any weapons banned from
citizens,"Nonsense.Not even the Conservative
Justices on the Supreme Court believe that.They wrote in DC v
Heller:(2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not
unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any
manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons
prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The
Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding
prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or
laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and
government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the
commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons
protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the
historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual
He's in his early 20's and very bright. I suspect schizophrenia or a
similar mental disorder. I think Holmes is knows what he has done--he
doesn't know right from wrong. There really isn't much we can do about
this kind of tragedy. Even with strict gun laws, Holmes would have been able to
get guns. There are just too many of them around.
In 2004, Congress let expire the assault weapons ban. The shooter used assault
weapons. Is it possible to have a rational discussion in this country about why
assault weapons and large capacity magazines are necessary?
When I came to comments my intention was to offer my condolences to the victims
and their families , this was such a tragedy, but then I read comments EPJ,
procuradorfiscal, cjb and ute alumni, I was horrified . To blame this on video
games, the lack of signs at the theater or even the lack of more weapons in the
audience and liberals goes beyond insensitive. I've been a hunter
both gun and bow all my life and I don't own any assault rifles nor does my
older brother a life long, now retired Marine. Never felt any good reason to own
one, the few guys I know who do own them I wouldn't trust them to use them
safely. All of my sport hunting friends don't own any either. We don't
need more people carrying guns or laws on video games, and certainly we
don't need a shootout in a dark, smoke-filled theater full of innocent
adults & children, this is not the Wild, Wild West. We do need more control
on assault weapons and the type of weapons that are meant to kill large numbers
As a combat veteran, I find it disturbing some people think this could have been
stopped or lessened if someone in the theater had a concealed-carry permit and
in fact would have been carrying a gun. 1. How do you know there
wasn't somebody with a handgun?2. How are you certain it would
have helped? I mean, hundreds of people running, screams, teargas, and
shooting. It's not a simple scenario. 3. The man was wearing
body armor. A lot of it. I can tell you there are at least a dozen
other factors for someone to deal with in a situation like this. I have been
there, and it is a frightening thing. Fear and adrenaline mix, panic sets in.
On top of that, that is only a generalized scenario. Every situation is
different than others, and there is no guarantee anything will ever work out. I
know if was there with friends and family, even with my handgun, my first
priority would have been their safety, not trying to get off the 'perfect
shot' in all of that confusion. If you weren't there, then
you have no place saying what you would have done.
How horrible. Your family members go out for an evening of entertainment in
what is supposed to be a relatively safe society - it wasn't like they were
going sky diving or cliff diving - just to a movie. Many lives will never be
the same.Quickly the battles begin over gun rights vs. gun control.
I personally feel we have a right to bear arms. I think it is too easy for a
disarmed society to fall victim to dictatorial regimes. All that being said, I
think we have grown numb to violence. Film makers do a great job with special
effects of portraying very violent scenes where no one really gets hurt and I
feel that in consequence, we have a generation now growing up seeing extreme
violence as a kin to entertainment where wrongs are avenged through bloody
reprisal and in the end, they roll the credits and turn up the lights.All the gun laws in the world won't restrict criminals bent on savagery.
Each crime prevention device only encourages cunning to over come them. Our
only real hope is to restore the moral code that we traded in for
@the truth:"They believed an armed citizenry was the final check
and balance against a tyrannical government."Which isn't
very practical these days... since the government owns such as nukes,
ICBM's, battleships, B-52's. etc. Can you imagine the citizenry
waging a battle with a few 6-shooters, AK47's or UZi's? In fact, if
you showed up at the Capitol in D.C. with a gun you'd likely be arrested
and thrown in jail.@Truthseeker:"They (the Court)
wrote in DC v Heller: (2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not
unlimited."Baloney! The Second Amendment says no such thing.
It says 'the RIGHT of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be
INFRINGED.' Period. Says nothing about any types of arms or who might be
excluded.If the Founders envisioned an exclusion, 'arms'
might be limited to a militia, which is defined as a civilian military force...
and it has to be a well a 'well regulated militia'... not deer
hunters, or causal target practice shooters.The Court Justices seem
to think they are gods, as we can see by your cite and by the recent Obamacare
RE: wrzYou seem to forget that a few colonists with pea shooters
defeated the mightiest army and navy in the world to free themselves from a
tyrannical king.States also have tanks and jets, and do you really
believe there would not be any in the military who might also rebel against a
tyrannical government. The military is the people. And what good would a
battleship do them if was controlled by someone not loyal to the "king"?
or against land locked states?The Founding Fathers wanted an armed
citizenry as final check and balnce, that is a historic fact.
I you like to shoot and kill like hunting and keep a weapon, you have serious
issues, it's all about feeling superior and empowered. hunting is not a
sport, is killing. Since when whe should feel good about taking somebody or
something else's life! that's wrong and insane.
The intent of the 2nd Amendment in the 1700's was far different than the
interpretation that is given to it now. 12 people are dead from guns that were
bought "legally". If there was ever an arguemnt against the same of guns
to anyone, it is this incident. There was never a gun in my house and there has
never been a gun in any house in which I lived. And for that I am truly
thankful. God bless my parents for not being id**ts.
@the truth:"You seem to forget that a few colonists with
peashooters defeated the mightiest army..."Peashooters? No,
they had muskets and cannons... same as the British. The armies seemed to be
well matched. The British navy didn't account for much. And the
'mightiest army in the world' was fighting on foreign soil, don't
forget. The war coulda gone either way. "...and do you really
believe there would not be any in the military who might also rebel against a
tyrannical government?Tyrannical government? We have one, as we
speak. The president thumbs his nose at laws he vowed to uphold when sworn in.
He lets illegals flood into this country (who will rule one day and soon). He
has given us unwanted government healthcare. He's sending our jobs
overseas (GE bailout) by the hundreds of thousands. He's spending us into
debt oblivion. He has refused to salute the American flag. We have tyranny
now. Where's the militia? This and other issues too numerous to mention
are what'll bring our system down. A militia packing muskets, peashooters,
or AK 47's is a joke. It's a different battle to save our country
to wrz about your comment at 9:06Wow! I don't like Obama but
you are nuts my friend, every single President since I have memory have done
whatever they want! Politicians here and any other country work for their
pockets, This is not about Obama only, is about the one who came before him and
all of them! what a lame comment.No guns, no weapons for civil use!