Mass shootings: Can they be stopped?
James Holmes, 24, was identified by law enforcement officers as the man who opened fire during a screening of "The Dark Knight Rises" at an Aurora, Colorado theater.
July 20th, 2012
06:46 PM ET

Mass shootings: Can they be stopped?

By Barbara Hall, CNN

(CNN) – The early-morning shooting inside a suburban Denver movie theater Friday is now among the deadliest in recent history. Authorities say the suspect, 24-year-old James Eagan Holmes, was studying neuroscience in a Ph.D. program at the University of Colorado School of Medicine.

Retired FBI profiler Jim Clemente says the perpetrators of these types of mass killings are typically disenfranchised young adult males who feel alienated by society. Clemente says their homicidal motives seem to be a product of genes and the environment:

[2:01] "Genetics loads the gun. Your personality and psychology aims it. And your experiences pull the trigger."

Hundreds of people have been killed in mass shootings over the past 30 years. But do these mass shootings represent a disturbing upward trend? Florida State University Criminologist Gary Kleck says no:

[3:19] "It's kind of absurd to talk about trends in events that occur maybe two or three times on average a year. So, there really isn't a particular, stable pattern to the frequency of mass killings."

Former profiler Jim Clemente believes there's very little society can do to put an end to all acts of senseless violence:

[4:01] "The more we are sort of careful with other people's feelings, the more we are sort of inclusive as a society, it's going to help avoid some of these situations. But some of them, I think, are bound to happen anyway just because people are going to fall through the cracks."

Share your thoughts on this story. Join the conversation and add your comments.

soundoff (694 Responses)
  1. Artfldgr

    Jeanne Assam … said she “did not think for a minute to run away” when a gunman entered the New Life Church in Colorado Springs and started shooting.

    There was applause as Assam spoke to a small crowd saying, “God guided me and protected me.”

    New Life’s Senior Pastor Brady Boyd called Assam “a real hero” because the gunman, Matthew Murray, “had enough ammunition on him to cause a lot of damage.” …

    “I saw him coming through the doors” and took cover, Assam said. “I came out of cover and identified myself and engaged him and took him down.” …

    Murray was carrying two handguns, an assault rifle and over 1,000 rounds of ammunition, said Sgt. Jeff Johnson of the Colorado Springs Police Department. …

    Boyd said Assam’s actions saved the lives of 50 to 100 people.

    July 23, 2012 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Bradavon

    Comparatively speaking, with so many Americans owning guns, you'd think America would be far safer than other civilised societies, except it isn't. Go figure.

    Guns don't make you safer, they just create a culture that it is somehow acceptable to own one (it's a gun people!) and increase the likelihood that this sort of thing will happen.

    Of course these nutjobs don't care about laws or even fit into the same demographic who abides the law and hopes he never has to shoot their gun but they fit very much in with the same culture that guns are perfectly fine to own. It's the culture that has created an unrealistic fear that you're unsafe and must own a gun to protect yourself. That's the polices job.

    I don't feel less safe because my constitution doesn't specifically allow me to own a gun. I doubt many other Europeans do either.

    The UK likely has as many nutjobs as The USA but statistically we get a hell of a lot less mass murders each year. Why is that?

    July 22, 2012 at 2:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mac


      You're factually incorrect on a number of levels.....

      1) Homicides in the US currently are at pre 1960 levels......Meaning despite MORE guns, MORE CCW, more people carrying, we are safer than we have been in 50 plus years.......That kind of refutes a significant part of your theory.....

      2) Pointing to Europe is comparing apples and oranges........The UK has a lower homicide rate, but a DETAILED explanation of the differences shows us why......and it's not legal gun ownership........Unlike the Europe, the US deals differently with it's drug problem........We have a huge drug distribution conflict in the US that does not occur in the US......The vast majority of the US population has a homicide rate equal to or lower than the UK or elsewhere in Europe........Ironically, the areas of the US with the HIGHEST concentrations of legally owned guns have the lowest homicide rates, including homicide..........Violence in the US occurs in small, extremely violent pockets, the inner-cities and on the border, both ground zero in the drug war.......the drug war being the root of the majority of the violence in the US, and that's rooted in drug policy.

      3) The UK has a lower homicide rate than the US, but a much higher robbery, arson, rape, assault, and sexual assault rate........The odds of being a victim of a crime society wide is far higher in the UK, with Scotland leading the first world in rapes and assaults........The odds of being the victim of any crime in the US is extremely small, and that includes homicides, so long as one avoids the drug trade which is the root of nearly all our violence.

      4) Active shooter incidents are the final area where you're sadly mistaken.......Statistically, despite far greater gun control, Europeans have these kinds of incidents at an equal or greater rate than the US......

      March 13, 1996 – BRITAIN – Gunman Thomas Hamilton burst into a primary school in the Scottish town of Dunblane and shot dead 16 children and their teacher before killing himself.

      April 28, 1996 – AUSTRALIA – Martin Bryant unleashed modern Australia's worst mass murder when he shot dead 35 people at the Port Arthur tourist site in the southern state of Tasmania.

      April 1999 – UNITED STATES – Two heavily-armed teenagers went on a rampage at Columbine High School in Littleton, Denver, shooting 13 students and staff before taking their own lives.

      July 1999 – UNITED STATES – A gunman killed nine people at two brokerages in Atlanta, after apparently killing his wife and two children. He committed suicide five hours later.

      June 2001 – NEPAL – Eight members of the Nepalese Royal family were killed in a palace massacre by Crown Prince Dipendra who later turned a gun on himself and died few days later. His youngest brother also died later raising the death toll to 10.

      April 26, 2002 – GERMANY – In Erfurt, eastern Germany, 19-year-old Robert Steinhauser opened fire after saying he was not going to take a math test. He killed 12 teachers, a secretary, two pupils and a policeman at the Gutenberg Gymnasium, before killing himself.

      October 2002 – UNITED STATES – John Muhammad and Lee Malvo killed 10 people in sniper-style shooting deaths that terrorized the Washington, D.C., area.

      April 16, 2007 – USA – Virginia Tech, a university in Blacksburg, Virginia, became the site of the deadliest rampage in U.S. history when a gunman killed 32 people and himself.

      November 7, 2007 – FINLAND – Pekka-Eric Auvinen killed six fellow students, the school nurse, the principal and himself with a handgun at the Jokela High School near Helsinki.

      September 23, 2008 – FINLAND – Student Matti Saari opened fire in a vocational school in Kauhajoki in northwest Finland, killing nine other students and one male staff member before killing himself.

      March 11, 2009 – GERMANY – A 17-year-old gunman dressed in combat gear killed nine students and three teachers at a school near Stuttgart. He also killed one other person at a nearby clinic. He was later killed in a shoot-out with police. Two additional passers-by were killed and two policemen seriously injured, bringing the death toll to 16 including the gunman.

      June 2, 2010 – BRITAIN – Gunman Derrick Bird opened fire on people in towns across the rural county of Cumbria. Twelve people were killed and 11 injured. Bird also killed himself.

      April 9, 2011 – NETHERLANDS – Tristan van der Vlis opened fire in the Ridderhof mall in Alphen aan den Rijn, south of Amsterdam, killing six before turning the gun on himself.

      July 22, 2011 – NORWAY – Police seize a gunman who killed 69 people at a youth summer camp of Norway's ruling political party, on the small, holiday island of Utoeya. Anders Behring Breivik is later charged with the killings, as well as with an earlier bombing in Oslo which killed eight people. The trial ended last month with Breivik saying that his bombing and shooting rampage was necessary to defend the country – prompting a walk-out by relatives of his victims.

      December 13, 2011 – BELGIUM – Gunman Nordine Armani killed three people, including a 17-month-old toddler, wounding 121 in a central square in the eastern city of Liege, before shooting himself. The next day Belgian investigators found the body of a woman in warehouse used by the gunman raising the death toll, including the killer, to five.

      July 20, 2012 – UNITED STATES – A masked gunman killed 14 people and wounded 50 others when he opened fire on moviegoers at a showing of new Batman film "The Dark Knight Rises" in the city of Denver.

      July 26, 2012 at 1:50 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Bradavon

    There has to be some connection between the sheer amount of mass killings that go on in America and the Second Amendment. Americans believe they have the right to own a gun, in the way few other civilised societies do. Few Europeans for instance believe it there actual right to own arms. It is not a right, it is a privilege.

    Banning guns simply won't work, it is an indoctrinated culture that Americans are allowed access to guns and that owning a gun makes you safer. This is patently obvious to outsiders. Nothing's going to change until your constitution is changed and that's not gonna happen any time soon.

    For a so called civilised country, The USA has a ridiculous amount of mass killing sprees year on year.

    July 22, 2012 at 2:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mac

      "Bradavon There has to be some connection between the sheer amount of mass killings that go on in America and the Second Amendment. Americans believe they have the right to own a gun, in the way few other civilised societies do. Few Europeans for instance believe it there actual right to own arms. It is not a right, it is a privilege.

      Banning guns simply won't work, it is an indoctrinated culture that Americans are allowed access to guns and that owning a gun makes you safer. This is patently obvious to outsiders. Nothing's going to change until your constitution is changed and that's not gonna happen any time soon.

      For a so called civilised country, The USA has a ridiculous amount of mass killing sprees year on year."

      Like I just pointed out.....the USA does not have a 'ridiculousl amount of mass killing sprees year on year' when compared to Europe.....the per capita number of such incidents is roughly equivalent, pretty well refuting that the difference in 'gun culture' is the driving force......IN FACT, the US isn't even in the top three for highest body count incidents in the last 10 years, Norway having the record with 67 killed in a single incident two years ago.

      You don't hear about Europes shooting sprees as often, because it doesn't fit the gun control agenda to mention them......But they are still happening, and happening frequently........Reality kind of refutes your argument.

      July 26, 2012 at 1:57 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Dewster

    Guns make it too easy to commit acts of evil. It's the weak that rally behind tools of destruction.

    July 22, 2012 at 11:34 am | Report abuse |
  5. Barbarians

    We have spent the last 100 years taking rights away from the victim. No one fears the consequences of these kinds of actions! It is time the government quite taking my rights away as a potential victim, by taking my guns, the only way I have to defend myself, and change the diffusion of "cruel and unusual punishment".

    Is stead of taking my guns and rights. Let us take his rights. In cases like this guilt is obvious, there should be a quickie trial within 5 days, no arguments for extenuating circumstances, no appeals, public excutetion by flogging on TV. This would make most of these "self importants" that think the world should know who they are. Also make it a criminal offence for any news media to use their name or show their picture after they are caught. Make them a "no name", nonperson.

    TRY TO TAKE OUR 2nd AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND YOU WILL SEE LOTS OF NOT SO SANE PEOPLE WITH GUNS DOING WHAT YOU CONSIDER NOT SO SANE "DEFENDING OUR RIGHTS"! I consider my rights to bare arms the second most important right. The first is freedom of speech; they are in the constitution in order of importance. The first is speech in hopes that you will not have to use the second to defend them all.

    July 22, 2012 at 8:52 am | Report abuse |
  6. Dennis

    Now I'm just waiting for all the gun control nuts to come out of the woodwork. I'll be glad when everyone comes to the realization that it is physically impossible for inanimate objects, while acting alone, to hurt or kill a human being. Will never happen without some degree of HUMAN interaction. The only people who care about laws are LAW ABIDING people. so if you take away guns the only people who will still have them are the ones who ignore laws. I don't understand why people have such a hard time understanding this. The thugs, murderers, "gangsta's", and others like this coward will just sit back and laugh thinking damn these people just made my life easier as now there are fewer people to shoot back at me. Wake up people.

    July 22, 2012 at 8:32 am | Report abuse |
    • Derek

      No one if looking to take away your guns. The issue is what does the public need a semi automatic gun with a 100 bullet mag for.. He could not have shot 70 people with a 6 shot handgun.. That there is no database to track when someone purchases large amount is an issue too. Most gun control nutjobs as you state just want to limit what guns can be purchases.. no one needs to have anything more than a handgun and/or shotgun..

      July 22, 2012 at 8:44 am | Report abuse |
      • Not Annie Oakley

        two words. Hunting rifle?

        July 22, 2012 at 8:46 am | Report abuse |
  7. Not Annie Oakley

    My sympathy and prayers for those families who were so cruelly attacked/killed for no reason. I hope those who were wounded get a speedy, whole recovery. I wish comfort for those who lost their loved ones in this. I'm sincerely sorry for your loss.

    With that, I would like to add that which should be considered in this debate about guns/bullets and more. I could submit many pages of news reports about people being attacked by wild animals. What about towns being taken over by wild animals? Pests like alligators and snakes too. There are wild dogs, pigs and other animals with with can be encountered in large packs. These animals have attacked humans and even killed. It is in these cases where being able to make more than 20 shots could be handy. Limiting the number of bullets could actually cost someone their life. I do however agree, why have a hundred bullets? Making bullets cost a punitive amount would also endanger some. Farmers have pests. I hunt and to make sure that I do not make whatever I hunt suffer needlessly, I need to practice. These are lean enough times. Many people hunt to supplement their food stores. Right now we are all very emotional and impassioned. Don't let action be caused by reaction, please. For this particular madman, there are millions of gun owners who never cause such heartache. People who would never want to take a human life for it is as precious as their own. I hope that our politicians don't create legislation that would end up costing more lives than saving. I hope we can all reach a respective and logical answer to stopping this type of horror in our blessed, beloved country. Thank you for letting me speak.

    July 22, 2012 at 8:31 am | Report abuse |
    • Not Annie Oakley

      I'm sorry, there was a sentence in my last posting that was unclear. My question posed was why have a hundred bullets and it should have been a hundred bullet clip/magazine. I beg pardon.

      July 22, 2012 at 8:38 am | Report abuse |
  8. Jane

    The public deserves a toxicology report on the suspect. Antidepressants have been linked to suicidal thoughts and other personality changes, what if there is a link? Do officials even do a blood test on these individuals like the Virginia Tech shooter and this guy? Guns have been around for a long time, something else is going very wrong.

    July 22, 2012 at 8:19 am | Report abuse |
  9. Derek

    I think it is wrong to believe they are all mentally ill. I think in many cases the thought of being immortalized is the biggest draw. They live mundane lives and think they will one day die having struggled through live and amounting to nothing. It all seems to be for naught. To drudge through 60 years, struggling, never being recognized, always believing that others have it better and that they are being put down by others.. To do something like this makes them center of attention and for that, the media is to blame.

    In regards to guns, he could not have shot 70 people with a single shot weapon.

    July 22, 2012 at 8:19 am | Report abuse |
    • Marshall

      Derek, you're right that he could not have shot 70 people with a single shot weapon. That's why if such a gun didn't exist, he would have found another way to hurt all those people. He had a lot of bomb making materials at his house, he could have tossed bombs into the crowd. Or he could have rented a truck and drove it into a crowd. Or he could have set the place on fire with gasoline that he got at a gas station. Or he could have poisoned a public water source. You can't stop a crazy person from hurting others.

      July 22, 2012 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
  10. HuPhartNgau

    The rampage would have been a lot harder to carry out with a single-shot muzzle-loading legitimate hunting rifle, rather than military grade semiautomatic weapons designed to kill people in rapid succession.

    July 22, 2012 at 8:06 am | Report abuse |
    • Marshall

      Whenever something bad like this happens, there is a knee-jerk reaction to ban things that they believe enabled it to happen.
      When someone picks off a person from a distance, there is a knee-jerk reaction to ban "sniper rifles". They say that nobody needs a sniper rifle. But a deer hunting rifle is a sniper rifle. Did they think of that? Also in this case the guy used an AR-15 with a 100 round magazine. People want to ban AR-15s, but it's just a rifle that accepts magazines. Don't let the plastic black stock fool you. The 100 round magazine was aftermarket. You could also make a 100 round magazine for many other rifles as well, it wouldn't be difficult at all.

      July 22, 2012 at 12:43 pm | Report abuse |
  11. GatorALLin

    DEAR CNN- Mas shootings will continue as long as the media at large gives the shooters immortality and posts their face up as the main picture for days ahead of the victims!! Mass media has shown no constraint over itself and in their attempts to give us the public at large a glimpse into the mind of a killer and what his house is like and what his life is like and what he must have been thinking..... they immortalize the monster....they parade it around like a bloody car accident everyone will rubber neck to see as they slow down and pass it on the interstate next to the dozen or so bright red flairs trailing smoke into the night... We used to respect CNN and others as news agencies, but now they are just gossip rags and entertainment companies selling banner advertisements, click through rates and and page views. That sickly grin on the killers face has been the main CNN page for days now.... does anyone know the name of the dead...or just the killer's name...and apartment and job and.... I rest my case, YOU CNN are GUILTY AS CHARGED!!!

    July 22, 2012 at 8:02 am | Report abuse |
    • steve intexas

      Yeah it's nothing to do with the fact there's more guns than people in this country. It's the media's fault for reporting it. If only they'd ignore it, it'd go away.

      July 22, 2012 at 8:07 am | Report abuse |
      • Ed

        Access to guns? What is it about PEOPLE you anti-gunners don't get? PEOPLE can be SICK and they will kill with whatever they can get their hands on. If not a gun they'll run a car full off 5 gallon cans of gas into a crowded building, they buy fertilizer slowly, maybe stab people at random. How about poison gas? It's sick people who are the issue and there's nothing we can do about them. People do bad things. The only thing I will concede is that guns are an easy way to kill in a fashion that leaves the shooter pretty much out of harms way. That however still does not remove the people factor or the fact that sick people will ALWAYS find a way to carry out their plans.

        July 22, 2012 at 8:30 am | Report abuse |
    • Katherine

      Mass shootings will continue as long as people have access to guns. It's just that simple! Illiterates should not have the right to insist on their "second amendment rights" which we all know refers to the arming of a MILITIA in times of war or other uprising. Key word, MILITIA, not illiterate, white trash.

      July 22, 2012 at 8:10 am | Report abuse |
      • Marshall

        Katherine, you are wrong. The 2nd amendment does not refer only to militias or the police/military. The Supreme Court has argued this case and decided that it applies to the general public. Do you think that you have better judgment than the Supreme Court?

        July 22, 2012 at 12:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Derek

      Completely agree.. During the worst years of IRA bombings, the media in the UK was ordered to silence the IRA and not give them a mouth piece for free communication based on the deaths of others.

      July 22, 2012 at 8:20 am | Report abuse |
  12. Jesse

    As soon as the media stops covering it.

    July 22, 2012 at 8:01 am | Report abuse |
  13. Jack

    I don't know how anyone can say this guy wasn't mentally ill. At least one definition of mental illness ought to be the indiscriminate killing of people for no apparent reason. I don't see how any kind of gun control laws could have stopped this.

    July 22, 2012 at 8:01 am | Report abuse |
  14. GatorALLin

    People don't kill people....Its Guns.... No wait... its the bullets that kill people.....no wait its the people that make the machines that make the bullets.....no wait its the chemicals within gun powder that make bullets that kill people..... No wait it was the Chinese that made the first fireworks, so they made gunpowder, so they kill people. Wait....Its old age that kills almost everyone....yeah....God made old age and he kills everyone. Can we outlaw old age....the real killer, or outlaw GOD, he made the atoms that made the chemicals that made the bullets that were in the guns....Heck God made the Chinese that made the gunpowder that lead to bullets that are used in Guns.....WAIT...I got it.... People invented GOD to have someone to blame for everything we don't understand and God made the atoms that made the Chinese that used the chemicals to invent gun powder that were used to make bullets that are used in Guns that kill people.....so it is People that kill People....crud, now I am confused. Kill 'em all, let GOD sort them out!

    July 22, 2012 at 7:52 am | Report abuse |
  15. Living Proof

    Until people put God back into their lives and take him seriously then this will never stop. Only God can change a persons heart and make them see the sanctity of life.

    July 22, 2012 at 7:48 am | Report abuse |
    • philabias

      You do mean the christian god right?
      the 1 who ordered israel to kill every man woman and child in the country of palistine
      the god who kills children and old to prove a point. the god who killed 10.000 and then had to repent. the god who said i am the god of both god and evil. the god who requires the prayer

      oh god please protect me from your followers...fool!

      July 22, 2012 at 7:56 am | Report abuse |
    • James

      Which God are you talking about? Since the beginning of recorded history, which is defined by the invention of writing by the Sumerians 6000 years ago, historians have cataloged 2870 deities. So which one do I need to take seriously? Zeus? Odin? Krishna? Vishnu? Ra?

      July 22, 2012 at 8:05 am | Report abuse |
    • tom

      Really? Than how do you explain the crusades, the inquisition, etc.?

      July 22, 2012 at 8:07 am | Report abuse |
    • Dennis

      OH please would you STFU and leave GOD where he should stay IN CHURCH!!!! I'm not against religion or anyone's right to practice religion but when people start relating GOD as the answer to everyone's problems yeah I have issues with that. Everybody is involved in what god would do, or what the bible says, or if you don't to church your gonna go to hell. Hell it's people's INTERPRETATION of religion and God that's half the reason for the problems in the world. People are against gay marriage because GOD says its wrong. Oh really and how would YOU know. Unless you are 6 billion years old and lived when God did you have no idea what he thought about things only what someone wrote down then passed down. You want seperation of church and state? Then fine keep them SEPERATE. Don't seperate them until using religion supports your argument.

      July 22, 2012 at 8:14 am | Report abuse |
  16. saywhatyoumean

    Why do people have to use these incidents to punish groups of people they don't like or are afraid of. There is absolutely no evidence so far that this man had mental health issues or was a criminal, yet I repeatedly hear how we "must do something" about the mentally ill or people with criminal records that are "obviously" responsible for this mass shooting.

    July 22, 2012 at 7:31 am | Report abuse |
  17. Cindy

    There are two things that can be done. First, many of these weapons have no purpose except to kill people. You can't hunt game with them or anything. They fire many rounds and they fire fast. They are solely for killing people. These kind of weapons can not be manufactured or sold to just anyone. I believe in an armed populace, but I also don't think just anyone should own these kind of weapons. Second, we need to start teaching how to fight back. If everyone fights back in some kind of organized fashion, its harder to kill everyone. They may kill a few, but they won't kill so many.

    July 22, 2012 at 7:18 am | Report abuse |
    • Gregorio

      The 2nd amendment is about self-defense, not hunting.

      July 22, 2012 at 7:38 am | Report abuse |
    • philabias

      yes you can hunt with them and i know hundreds who do including myself
      you just showed your stupidity

      July 22, 2012 at 7:52 am | Report abuse |
    • Dennis

      So putting yourself into a situation like this just where exactly would YOU be in this "organized fashion"???? Human flesh has no chance against a bullet.

      July 22, 2012 at 8:21 am | Report abuse |
    • Ed

      Because someone might misuse it we will ban it? Not anyone can own it? We could say that about cars, motorcycles, even knives. No, you don't punish everyone because someone might do something bad with a particular thing. There's nothing we can do about these people. They are sick and we can't figure out who they are until they act. THAT is what all this talk is about, our inability to control every aspect of our lives. As for an armed populace, I agree, I am armed 24/7/365 and I think EVERYONE needs to be licensed to carry and take a safety training course. As for this case, I and anyone like me who responded would likely have been killed since we would have had no idea that he was decked out in protective gear. Once committed there would be no turning back. This guy was prepared and an armed populace in this case would probably not have mattered.

      July 22, 2012 at 8:38 am | Report abuse |
    • George H. Foster

      Your comment, in total, makes no sense. On the one hand, you want a gun ban on any weapon that can kill another human being – based on some sort of arbitrary limitation. But then you think that if everybody fought back, the death toll could be lower. What weapon(s) are you suggesting as permissible?

      .James Eagen Holmes was crazy but not stupid. Mr. Holmes's methodology was built on a number of people's earlier work, including Klebold and Harris of Columbine, Cho of Virginia Tech, and Norway's Anders Breivik.

      He set up a diversion for the police, as Cho and Breivik did.

      Mr. Holmes picked a "Gun Free Zone" to make his statement in, curtesy of the theater chain where the movie was playing. Law abiding citizens would follow this rule; Holmes used it to facilitate his attack plan. Klebold and Harris picked a school. Cho did that at Virginia Tech – the school made being gun free a mantra, and Breivik knew the laws in Norway, especially at the location on the lake.

      Mr. Holmes, like Cho (who chained the doors to the classroom builiding shut) and Breivik (by selecting the island with limited access where the meeting was being held), picked a location where he could limit escape.

      Mr. Holme's new wrinkle was the use of gas to generate more confusion. What will the next whacko think to add to this methodology, I wonder.

      It is also interesting that there is nothing in the social media from/about Mr. Holmes. Perhaps he has to be more mysterious than Breivik, who used social media, or Cho, who sent that video to NBC.

      All Mr. Holmes weapons were acqured legally – he passed the background checks because he had a clean criminal and mental health record. As to the ranting about the amount of ammunition he had acquired (Piers Morgan, the Mad Englishman, is forthing at the mouth over this), I would suggest that the nobody would be interested in the size of a wine cellar that a drunk driver who killed 12 people had in his home, or for that matter unopened in his trunk.

      His gas mask and body armor were a costume for the event, not tools to get it done. If he was wearing the body armor for protection from return fire by the police, he would not have given up so easily outside the theater.

      If my analysis seems clinical, there is a reason. I am a strong gun owner rights defender, carry a concealed weapon everywhere is it legal, and I live in Florida, the Home of Stand Your Ground. Events like this are situations for me to analyse to plan for my response, should it occurr. I am responslble for my own personal security, and by inference the security of the space and time I am in. Mr. Holmes comes from the Other/Dark Side, and that source of goals and objectives will require me to take care of my responsibilities over my desire for non-violence.

      We have a mental heath issue, not a gun or violence one. We need to develop some sort of structure to deal with people who are slipping into some sort of mental condition that could result in these kinds of events, not looking to use it for an excuse to just do something to do something for some other agenda (gun control). There is a need to provide help without taking away a person's individual rights and dignity.

      July 22, 2012 at 8:56 am | Report abuse |
  18. Phil

    Gun control isn't the answer. Blaming the gun in a shooting is like blaming the automobile in an accident. It has been disclosed that this jerk has been planning this for months, ordering and receiving shipments of this weaponry and other items used. Surely, someone noticed this...ahead of the attack. Things are tough, life is tough...and when you witness this kind of preparation being done....TELL SOMEONE!!! We all need to be more diligent and more aware of what happens around us...and take the appropriate action BEFOREHAND.

    July 22, 2012 at 7:06 am | Report abuse |
    • Stein

      Not strictly true.

      Gun control will obviously not prevent all attacks. But the real choice is not between "preventing all attacks" and "not doing anything".

      It is between "trying to limit the amount and types of weapons being _easily_ available to people who should not be trusted with weapons", and "doing nothing".

      Obviously making it harder to get hold of guns (and in particular many guns or guns with large magazines), will make it _harder_ for people to commit mass murder with guns.

      In theory, the murderer could have run through the crowd with a knife stabbing people at random – but in real life, a knife wielding nutcase is less likely to cause this kind of mayhem than one with several guns, since a gun has longer range, and is faster to use than a knife to attack multiple victims in a short time span.

      The assailant could have killed a large number of people using a bomb instead of guns. But bombs are harder to make than it is to go buy a gun, and they are less portable. The chances of being discovered before the attack is carried out is larger for bombs. The chance of a dud is much higher. The chance of the would-be-assailant accidentally killing himself while preparing a bomb is higher.

      In short – the core problem with guns, as opposed to other possible avenues of attacks, is that they both are efficient tools for killing people and easily available.

      And this is a challenge the NRA members should acknowledge, instead of running a moronic "guns don't kill people" campaign. People **using guns** kill people. Efficiently.

      It is common sense to try to limit access to guns to people having reasonably sensible reasons for wanting a gun, and trying to ensure that these people are handling their guns in a reasonably safe way. Reasonable people can disagree on exactly where the lines ought to be drawn, but there is a need for lines to be drawn somewhere, instead of just sticking your fingers in your ears and religiously chanting "guns don't kill people".

      July 22, 2012 at 7:25 am | Report abuse |
    • dnick47

      Same bs we've heard since the John Kennedy's murder: "Don't control guns cause then only outlaws will have guns!" As far as I am concerned you can have all the guns you want as long as they are registerest like motor vehicles and you pay the fee to keep them registered; and, carry insurance on each one so incase you miss and a human being is hurt of killed 100% of his medical bills are paid, he gets 100% income for the rest of his life (till age 100) and in the event of deathm a one time only payment of $10 million dollars. All of this tied 1 to 11 with inflation. As a gun nut Republican you can see this is the Capitalist way of handling it by allowing insurance to gouge you and get rich as the rest of us are offered a measure of protection.

      July 22, 2012 at 7:43 am | Report abuse |
  19. Nick

    In the UK, guns are banned and you need to have a license (which is incredibly hard to get) to own one. Mass shootings are very uncommon here. There is definitely a correlation between the two.

    July 22, 2012 at 6:33 am | Report abuse |
    • chris

      However, UK has higher rate of violent crimes with guns that go unstopped. In the US, there is a higher likelyhood that someone else will have a firearm to protect themselves against would-be robber/mugger/rapist/etc. The main point that must be accepted is that firearms are never going to go away. Giving people the right and ability to "even the odds" against criminals only makes society better. This was seen especially in Australia when they banned guns about a decade ago. You saw gun related murders decrease, but violent crimes increase by 20-30% depending on the crime (robbery, mugging, vandalism, etc). There is enough statistical evidence even in the United States that show states with more relaxed gun laws against those with strict gun laws (like Aurora, CO) have different crime rates.

      On another note, these massacres always occur in "Gun Free Zones" such as movie theaters, malls, schools, and government institutions (ie Fort Hood). Then you always see crimes being stopped in other places that don't have gun restrictions such as the 70yo man a couple weeks ago in the internet cafe who shot the 2 robbers who were assaulting people with baseball bats while having guns on them.

      July 22, 2012 at 7:09 am | Report abuse |
  20. joe

    NRA's answer is buy more guns! Take them to the theater and anywhere else you go for protection. Everyone needs one. The bigger the magazine the better to protect you.

    July 22, 2012 at 6:08 am | Report abuse |
    • David

      Anger and hurt is expected now. That said, it is insulting to the families and victims to spew hatred and anger against the NRA or anyone supporting our Constitutional rights. When you do that, you spit on the graves of brave men and women who died just as agonizing deaths in defense of the second ammendment. Think for a change in addition to feeling. I can think of at least six cases recently where armed citizens STOPPED mass murder by having a gun when the shooting started. Subjects meekly do and speak as their betters tell them they should. Free men and women think for themselves. It is sick to blame anyone other than the person who did this.

      July 22, 2012 at 6:27 am | Report abuse |
    • Tom

      Yep – Joe, it is clearly the NRA's fault that there are mental messes running around the country like Holmes. You have it figured out.

      July 22, 2012 at 7:08 am | Report abuse |
  21. Oldeye

    I hate to say this but this guy's picture is haunting.
    He has a very disturbed look in his eyes.
    It would be better to show him wearing the gas mask.
    This guys is sick in the head.

    July 22, 2012 at 6:06 am | Report abuse |
  22. mmi16

    A lone individual that wants to kill people has too many tools available to him to prevent the deaths of a least a few people before he can in some form overpowered and stopped.

    The Aurora twit – in addition to his arsenel had body armor. I am surprised that he surrendered.

    July 22, 2012 at 6:03 am | Report abuse |
  23. Cosmo

    All you Antis out there wanting Guns banned don't forget to Put Box Cutters on your list. Where they not responsible for the biggest massacre in American History. Killing over 3 thousand on that day. Box cutters?

    July 22, 2012 at 5:43 am | Report abuse |
    • Charlton Heston

      In case you forgot, we now have Box Cutter Control that is very effective. These "weapons' are not allowed on airplanes. By the way, guns are also not allowed on airplanes, which is also effective. If Holmes was not allowed to buy his guns, he would bot have used them. So, you can't make peole walk through body scanners everywhere, but you can stop gun companies from making them and eventually purge them from society.

      July 22, 2012 at 6:23 am | Report abuse |
      • Tom

        "but you can stop gun companies from making them and eventually purge them from society."

        In what world do you live?

        July 22, 2012 at 7:05 am | Report abuse |
      • Geoge Soros

        You are one of the sheep.

        July 22, 2012 at 7:18 am | Report abuse |
      • Gregorio

        The genie is out of the bottle.

        July 22, 2012 at 7:41 am | Report abuse |
  24. boywonder

    I'm tired of blogs/ shows based on understanding a killer's mentality. If he was of middle eastern descent, the media would label him a terrorist & wont even bother about the psychology part of it. No insanity plea for this coward of expressionless magnitude

    July 22, 2012 at 5:40 am | Report abuse |
    • Oldeye

      Apples and Oranges.
      You are not with it.
      It's people like you (mostly have no idea what you are saying) that can
      throw discussion off the track. Please troll elsewhere.

      July 22, 2012 at 5:52 am | Report abuse |
    • Frank

      If he was middle eastern he was Muslim and the Koran they all worship COMMANDS THEM ALL to ki11 non Muslims. These people are mass murdering for a GOD and the ideology of Mohammed who is a spitting image of Adolph Hiter. Big difference between a terrorist who has been brainwashed from birth the ki11 non Muslims and man with a rotting brain, a lunatic, a psychopath. Its NIGHT and DAY

      July 22, 2012 at 6:11 am | Report abuse |
  25. SPW

    They could be stopped to a further extent, but at the price of our freedom and self-security.

    It's something we honestly shouldn't dabble with, I know people want to place the recent events on guns, however these events will still unfold.

    I see no reason why rifles are easily accessible to the public, pistols don't bother me however anything above that is simply unnecessary for personal security and shouldn't be readily available for people.

    July 22, 2012 at 5:38 am | Report abuse |
    • JenM

      I agree – there is a right to bear arms, but it doesn't say we need semi-automatic weapons. Why not let people protect themselves with a pistol? It would be harder to mass murder people with a small gun. And then would give anyone carrying a gun for personal protection stand a chance to respond. You usually don't see people walking around with military style armaments if they only want them for protection. They should be illegal.

      July 22, 2012 at 6:51 am | Report abuse |
      • Marshall


        I agree – there is a right to bear arms, but it doesn't say we need semi-automatic weapons. Why not let people protect themselves with a pistol?"

        JenM, most pistols that you buy are semi-automatic, and have been for a very, very long time. One of the most successful designs, the Colt .45, has been around since 1911.

        July 22, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
  26. Leif

    Since the majority of these events take place here, at least as far as first world countries go, then yes, obviously more could be done to prevent it.

    July 22, 2012 at 5:14 am | Report abuse |
  27. PhilG




    Be it the handgun magazine that holds twenty or thirty or fourty rounds or now unfortunately the nut case fringe has found the massive 100 round rifle round magazine of which an assailant could have five or six or their person at one time-albeit pretty bulky but helD on a shoulder sling doable.

    These high cpoacity magazines are the PROBLEM-NOT THE GUNS USED.




    The amazing thing here ia that people with a total anti gun agenda want to put concelaed weapon permits and all gun rights on the same bucket and ban all firearns when the concealed weapons community of which I am a legal owner and user BY FAR do not use the -high capacity- semi auto handgun.

    They use ten round ot less semi auto handguns or BY FAR they use the five shot revolver as their weapons of choidece.







    July 22, 2012 at 4:57 am | Report abuse |
    • TJ

      Over your dead body. Maybe.

      July 22, 2012 at 5:19 am | Report abuse |
    • Oldeye

      Well your logic is flawed in that the insane and the criminals are not going to
      abide by any laws. 10 round or 100 round, revolvers, pistols, machine pistols,
      assault rifles, you name it. The variety is endless. The point is, gun ownership
      must be denied for those that are criminal and insane. But there always will be
      first timer. Ones that fall through the "cracks". Magazine capacity is not the issue.
      Self-defense is the core of this issue. We must be able to defend from any and
      all evil among us. The evil is the one that will do harm to any singular person
      or collective society. Why do you think we have guns?

      July 22, 2012 at 6:16 am | Report abuse |
      • Charlton Heston

        We have guns because the NRA wants us to have them in order to help them and the gun manufacturers to make a profit..

        July 22, 2012 at 6:32 am | Report abuse |
        • Joe T

          Such a brave person you are not to use your real name .Chicken and yellow to the core The " Sky is falling" kind makes people sick.

          July 22, 2012 at 7:50 am | Report abuse |
    • Dude

      Please stop yelling at me.

      July 22, 2012 at 7:13 am | Report abuse |
    • GatorALLin

      ....Remember the high capacity Mag of 100 was found jammed at about 72 rounds. He apparently did not have a 2nd one and quit shooting the gun as soon as it was jammed. Most Military, Swat and other users of AR-15 like weapons don't use mags over about 30 for the reason that the springs are too long and thus can't push out the bullets at a constant pressure (leading to jams). One could argue that had he used 30 round mags tapped back to back (totals 60) and had a few of these pairs he would have been much more deadly. He basically ran out of ammo faster thanks to the big mag.

      July 22, 2012 at 7:34 am | Report abuse |
      • George H. Foster

        Good point GatorALLin.

        Any magazine beyond 30 in any weapon, and any pistol magazine that extends below the handle is suspect for reliability. I am a firm believer in using standard – not 10 round Klinton Kripple – magazines in my guns. I carry a spare magazine not for additional ammunition, but to deal with magazine failure. Detachable magazines are an expendable and temporary item.

        July 22, 2012 at 9:10 am | Report abuse |
    • Alan knoblauch

      I agree. But the magazines should be limited further, perhaps to three rounds. I would also be in favor of only allowing bolt action only guns for sale. With military grade weapons your gaining to get military casualty numbers. The NRA is wrong.

      July 22, 2012 at 8:43 am | Report abuse |
    • Dennis

      @PhilG, Dude you keep bringing up THE LAW THE LAW. Here's a clue Genius, criminals don't care about THE LAW. If they did they wouldn't be criminals.

      July 22, 2012 at 8:55 am | Report abuse |
  28. Gc

    Assault weapons need to be banned, these events have increased since the assault weapons ban was lifted. The only purpose of these weapons is to kill people. These weapons represent an unacceptable level of risk to the general population. Judgments have to be made about levels of risk and clearly we make them.. Would we legalize nuclear weapons? Would you want them in your neighbors house?

    July 22, 2012 at 4:57 am | Report abuse |
    • Oldeye

      We, as a free society, have the ability to purchase and own guns of all types.
      There are tens of thousands of FFL holders who are able to own and sell all
      types of guns, including automatic and semi-automatic guns. There are likely
      that many Americans who own fully automatic guns. Point here is that just because
      we have the ability to own them does not allow for us to use them against fellow
      American who do no harm to others. The implied and understood fact is that guns are used
      for sporting, hunting, competitive and defensive purposes. We may never have to
      use them for defensive purposes but when we do, we must do it to preserve
      ourselves from harm, any harm. People like Holmes have lost this perspective because
      he has fallen through the "crack". When he decided to harm others, he has forfeited his
      right to life himself. When you fire a weapon into a crowd, you deserve the same. When
      you fire into a crowd, the crowd has the right to fire into you. In this case, the crowd had
      no fire. In the god forsaken lands of middle east, religious or ideologically challenged people
      do far more destruction by using explosives strapped unto their worthless bodies and kill
      others. It's the mind(or lack of it) that controls the actions. Not the means to do it.

      July 22, 2012 at 6:37 am | Report abuse |
      • Dude

        1. Full automatic weapons are rarely, if ever, used in shooting sprees.

        2. Returning fire would not have done any good. He was wearing body armor. Trying to make a head shot in a dark theater, in tear gas, while people are running and panicking with a hand gun is essentially impossible.

        July 22, 2012 at 7:17 am | Report abuse |
        • George H. Foster

          Dude –

          Return fire would have altered his Situational Expectation, and – like his magazine jam – shortened the event. This is basic military tactics – fire into an ambush, do not just sit there and take it. Every person who went to Vietnam was taught that. A head shot or a leg wound would have been difficult to make, but the effort would have altered his confidence and made his shooting less focused.

          I would have wanted to use my 12+1 Nine anyway.

          July 22, 2012 at 9:15 am | Report abuse |
      • Grogg

        How many shots does it take to hunt??????????????

        July 22, 2012 at 7:57 am | Report abuse |
  29. Mark 5

    It is not how people kill others, it is why. All the gun banners are focusing on the how and not the why. If someone uses a car to run down a crowd of people, would we blame the car? No, we would blame the driver. To blame guns is ridiculous and shows paranoia and fear is ruling the day. The Bath school disaster bombing in Michigan in 1927 killed 38 elementary school children, two teachers, four other adults and the bomber himself; at least 58 people were injured. Today in the middle east, bombs are the weapon of choice. This guy could have just as easily set of an IED in the theater. But he seemed to want drama and infamy. That is part of the "why". Perhaps we should focus our intentions on why these killers are doing this, not the how. In the middle east, we know the why. Perhaps we can discover why people are doing this here and then try to find a solution. Wasting our time and energy on the how is tragic.

    July 22, 2012 at 4:38 am | Report abuse |
    • harpman

      There have always been disturbed people among. The problem now is that for homicidal people, there are more tools available to take multiple lives. When the constitution was framed, the weapons available were single shot muskets that took some time to reload and hunting knives. Now, a 60 shot assault rifle is available to anyone. This is not good in a society that bombards our young people with violent movies, TV, and video games.

      July 22, 2012 at 5:07 am | Report abuse |
    • CN

      the car analogy is tired and specious. a car is designed to quickly get an individual from point a to point b. a gun has one purpose. to fire a high velocity missile to quickly destroy another life form. it has no other purpose. there is no comparison, and those repeating it are demonstrating that they are simply regurgitating absurd talking points.

      July 22, 2012 at 6:15 am | Report abuse |
      • GatorALLin

        ....I would argue that 99.99% of all bullets are shot at targets (non living) of some kind. I agree it could be practice for living things.... but mostly they kill paper or non living things.

        July 22, 2012 at 7:40 am | Report abuse |
      • Marshall

        "CN- the car analogy is tired and specious. a car is designed to quickly get an individual from point a to point b. a gun has one purpose. to fire a high velocity missile to quickly destroy another life form. it has no other purpose. there is no comparison, and those repeating it are demonstrating that they are simply regurgitating absurd talking points."

        CN, the purpose of the gun-control discussion is to see if we can stop these mass murders. The person with the car example brought up a valid point, that you could easily murder a large group of people using a car. The intended purpose of the device is irrelevant, the end result is all that matters. If you're going to focus only on the intended purpose, then you're just going to be left saying "well it wasn't meant for that" every time a mass murder happens.

        July 22, 2012 at 1:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • Charlton Heston

      Your solution is to arm the children. How is that gonna work?

      July 22, 2012 at 6:36 am | Report abuse |
  30. Galluccio

    "Clemente says their homicidal motives seem to be a product of genes and the environment:"

    That pretty much covers everything.... Genes and the environment.

    July 22, 2012 at 4:16 am | Report abuse |
  31. Nick

    Guns or home-made explosives, dedicated people who have decided to cause harm to others will figure out how. There are billions of people in the world, seems that given that number, there are going to be a few that select few that slip through all of societies checks to do something truly horrible. These freak occurrences should be treated as such and avoid trying to make laws that will do more to remove normal people's rights and still have no impact on these.

    July 22, 2012 at 4:01 am | Report abuse |
  32. Merlin D. DuVall

    Guns cannot be proven to be a big part of the problem, it takes a warped mind to kill any innocent person.

    July 22, 2012 at 3:36 am | Report abuse |
  33. Merlin D. DuVall

    The cause of most mass killings was the result of a traumatic experience when the killer was a child. Then when things do not go right for them as an adult they revert to the earlier experience to justify what they do in killing innocent people.
    Teaching parents to react properly to their children's bad experiences would be the first and best solution.

    July 22, 2012 at 3:34 am | Report abuse |
  34. Shawn

    Ladies and Gentlemen, give me a break. The 2nd amendment is in place and will remain in place to protect us from what it was written to protect us from....a government seeking total control, much like King George III had when we revolted. While we don't have that issue right now, the government has to be forever mindful that the populace can rise up and revolt if they infringe on our rights and stop working for us as they should.

    That beinf said, ther eis something you will never contorl, and thats the ability of someone crazy to go out and do something crazy. If he didn't have a gun, he would have soaked the roof in gasoline or some other method to carry out his craziness. The only real deterrent is real pain and suffering if you commit a crime like this. Prison needs to become "Prison". One mass cell thats locked up, pumped full of adrenaline producing drugs and the lights turned out every night, so the sun dawns every day on a few more of these nothings tortured and killed. Or maybe a gladiator style combat sold on Pay Per View with the proceeds used to do some good....healthcare could be paid for in a heartbeat....

    July 22, 2012 at 3:33 am | Report abuse |
    • Rebel

      Well said, I agree.

      July 22, 2012 at 3:49 am | Report abuse |
  35. Jim_34

    It is easy to stop. Take away the guns. Take away television, radio, the Internet, cell phones, telephones, movies, video games and newspapers.

    July 22, 2012 at 2:56 am | Report abuse |
    • Bartholomew J. Worthington III

      So in other words, no.

      July 22, 2012 at 3:29 am | Report abuse |
  36. adrianforte

    Mass shootings, can they be stopped? Another penetrating question from CNN. Everyone with half a brain knows there's no way to stop the acts of a madman who has set his will on killing a bunch of people. Masses of stupid questions by CNN meant to create lame little articles to generate page clicks so they can throw more ad banners at us, can they be stopped? Answer is the name, no. You can't stop the act of an ad-man either.

    July 22, 2012 at 2:49 am | Report abuse |
  37. brown

    Why stop Mass Shootings?

    I don't want them to stop! Society wants to be entertained, we feed off of the carnage.
    Many among us fantasize about being the perpetrator in the next Mass Shooting. Don't take this away from us.

    We like to pretend that our sympathies towards the victims' is sincere and genuine. It is not.

    July 22, 2012 at 2:39 am | Report abuse |
    • Robert

      Sadly, you speak the truth...

      July 22, 2012 at 2:40 am | Report abuse |
  38. rhondajo3

    These mass murders were not around when I grew up in the 60s and 70s, well, yes there was Manson. And then when my children were little there was the guy who was murdering little boys in Atlanta, and we lived just a few miles away. But it seems to me, that mass murders are becoming more frequent. I can't help but wonder if the violent games kids are playing all day, instead of playing outside with other children has a negative effect on their perception of reality and their knowledge of right and wrong. Who is teaching today's children morals? I was raised up in a Pentecostal Church, and raised my kids the same, but what about the children who are not raised in a church that teaches Biblical morals? What about them? Where do they learn right from wrong?

    July 22, 2012 at 2:38 am | Report abuse |
    • gerry

      the reason these things seem more common is because of all the news media, human nature doesn't change

      July 22, 2012 at 2:55 am | Report abuse |
    • uncle remus

      Are you serious? Crack open a history book. Where do kids nowadays get their morals if they don't go to church? Gee, let me think – how about THEIR PARENTS?

      It's people like you who self-righteously think that you are good, while others are not. You are the type of person who probably would have given this kid a weird look should he have walked up to you to talk. Unfortunately, someone to just talk to or just someone being nice to him is something that night have prevented all of this from happening.

      As a society, we all need to change how we treat each other – no matter what age, color, creed, church, etc... We are all distancing ourselves from one another and this is not good. are we not ALL god's children? We are ALL on the SAME level. Nobody is better than anybody else.

      July 22, 2012 at 6:37 am | Report abuse |
  39. DrinksAreOnYou

    If someone would have given 'the loner' a stick of gum on occasion, perhaps this could have been avoided. I doubt his cell in solitary confinement is much more different than his normal life.

    July 22, 2012 at 2:35 am | Report abuse |
    • uncle remus

      This simple statement is perhaps the most insightful I have read tonight.

      We all treat each other like cr@p nowadays and it does nothing but help motivate people like this one to lash out.

      July 22, 2012 at 6:30 am | Report abuse |
  40. Devil

    We will continue shooting fols because the NRA would like to make it legal to use guns to shoot people so they can sell more poducts. Life has no meaning but gun sales are good for the gun companies. It is that simple....

    July 22, 2012 at 2:30 am | Report abuse |
    • Robert

      You are completely stupid... Guns are the only thing that keeps the people equal to their government... Why do thing the government wants to take them... And don't give me the whole "Your vote is your weapon" BS... Its just as fixed as 9/11 or this shooting... You are sheeple... back to the heard with you...

      July 22, 2012 at 2:39 am | Report abuse |
    • Rebel

      Guns don't kill people. People kill people. NRA is to help protect the rights of the honest and educated people in America in regards to the 2nd Amendment. The guns are not the issue. Gun laws have nothing to do with controlling crime. Most who commit these crimes don't get their guns legally anyway. Gun laws only have to do with the disarmament of America so the Government can control ALL our lives.

      July 22, 2012 at 3:57 am | Report abuse |
    • James Alexander

      @ Devil

      The two aren't related. The NRA doesn't sell guns. The rights of the people to bear arms is a constitutional right and accordingly, "shall not be infringed." PERIOD.

      It really doesn't matter how many massacres, staged shootings, or illegal gun operations to tarnish the 2nd Amendment like Fast and Furious occur; those are all tangential issues to the bottom line, the Constitution.

      If someone kills someone with a knife, we don't outlaw knives. It's the KILLER that is the problem, not the TOOL that he decides to use.

      The next time some distraught Mother drowns her baby out of desperation, perhaps we can all agree to outlaw water.

      Ridiculous. Keep the "blame" where it belongs...on the PERSON doing the crime, not whatever tool he decides to use.

      This should be obvious.

      July 22, 2012 at 4:11 am | Report abuse |
  41. n8Dog

    Dumb article. When crazy stops, events of such will too. Being that's not in the near future, your best bet is to wish it away, or stay inside a box somewhere forever and await your own death. Life sucks, get a helmet. Things like this.. absolutely nuts. Guns? Oh I dunno.. MAYBE.. just maybe.. there's a connection with the whole – Gun Deaths in the US being like 10X any other country.. but of course.. that's OUR RIGHT!!!! Right? Or better stated, correct Right Wingers? Anyway... lame event. This kid cracked or went wacked. I'd be interested to know if drugs were involved. He clearly studied brain function... and was doing well.. I wonder if he tried things that messed him up.. if not.. he was wacked from jump.. This story – still stupid

    July 22, 2012 at 2:24 am | Report abuse |
  42. moose

    I don't think it could be stopped he could of took glass bottles filled with gas and burnt place down there are lots of ways to kill people if you want to looks like he took alot of time to plan he could of just drove a semi right into theater I think purchasing 6000 rounds of ammo should of set of a red flag only maybe a pro target shooter would need that in a year time hunters might use a 100 with lots of target shooting maybe we should ban bullet proof vests for public to purchase

    July 22, 2012 at 2:22 am | Report abuse |
  43. Eric

    Yes they can be stopped to a great extent. In this case, this psychopath should not have been able to get most of his murder gear from online.
    First of all there should be clear and urgent laws banning such sales, since screening of the buyer is not fully possible. Secondly, if such laws are already there, then those who sold the stuff are equally culpable in the crime for breaking those laws: seal their businesses, dump them into a prison and throw away the keys: set the punishment as an example for those who go only for the moolah.

    July 22, 2012 at 2:19 am | Report abuse |
  44. Hien Tu

    Stop glorifying violence, in real life as well as in movies and video games.
    Stop the constant barrage from the media showing the faces of these violent people over and over, making a celebrity of these people.
    Ban automatic and semi-automatic weapons from the public–only military personnel should be handling thees weapons.

    July 22, 2012 at 2:17 am | Report abuse |
    • Peace

      We have a culture of violence. Action movies, like the show when this happens, sold. Video games are even terribly messier.

      July 22, 2012 at 2:22 am | Report abuse |
      • Robert

        So lets ban it all?

        July 22, 2012 at 2:41 am | Report abuse |
    • James Alexander

      @ Hien Tu

      Re: "Ban automatic and semi-automatic weapons from the public..."

      It's not the guns! It's the people using them. Don't be confused.

      Without guns, the government has 100% control with no threat to that control. Look down through history... THAT is what we have to fear MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, a government with a monopoly of force!

      July 22, 2012 at 4:18 am | Report abuse |
  45. DJT

    Gun rights activists & pro gun control fanatics need to take their pick. Its either going to be armed military personel in every public auditorium, shopping center & public facility, or massive seizure of firearms, whether they have been legally purchased or black market produced & sold. There is no other argument to occupy, unless were talking a national or global security emergency situation, thus requiring a step of action for martial law.

    July 22, 2012 at 2:16 am | Report abuse |
  46. JJ

    Do you think this fellow would have figured out how to get his guns illegally if he could not buy them legally? He somehow figured out how to build bombs and he did not go to the store and buy them. If he was this motivated to kill people would he have not found his weapons of mass destruction one way or another? Who will protect you from the potential of a tyrannical government if citizens do not have the right to protect themselves? I guess the answer to all these questions to keep us safe from all evil in the world is just to give complete control to the government. Give them the ability to monitor your email, checking accounts, grope you at the airport, etc. Oh I guess that has already been tried and thousands of citizens of those countries have lost their lives to those governments. I guess you somehow think that if those in power share similar philosophies of life as you, and then you will be safe from… Papers please!! Give up all your freedoms for safety and soon you will be very unsafe.

    July 22, 2012 at 2:14 am | Report abuse |
    • James Alexander

      @ JJ

      Beautifully said!

      Look throughout history... when a government obtains a monopoly of force, then the people suffer. In most cases, MILLIONS ARE EXTERMINATED. As has been said, if the people give up their liberty for a little temporary safety, they don't deserve either!

      If the U.S. government gets the guns from the people, I guarantee you that it will be a very short amount of time until they claim all of the land as well! Want to be a serf or slave? Modifying the 2nd Amendment in any way is the best bet in bringing about a very dangerous future.

      July 22, 2012 at 4:25 am | Report abuse |
  47. Realist

    Keep your right to bear arms. Just tax the hell out of the ammunition.

    July 22, 2012 at 1:55 am | Report abuse |
    • mistamista

      That's what I've always said too. Chris Rock has a funny skit about the idea of making bullets $5,000 a piece. You'd have to really, REALLY hate someone to shoot them with a $5,000 bullet, right?

      July 22, 2012 at 2:04 am | Report abuse |
      • moose

        I hunt and have guns they could have you fill out a form every time you buy ammo or have a 20 dollar fee and give you a card to swipe every time you buy ammo to track people buy huge amounts I hate to break the news to people but living in the western US people still need guns for protection against snakes bears and cougars if you camp or do much outdoors if you don't believe me come on out and spend a night in a tent in the mountains

        July 22, 2012 at 2:27 am | Report abuse |
        • Albion

          You're kidding right? Or just paranoid. Encountering cougars, bears, and even snakes is exceedingly rare even in Alaska. Don't try to cuddle baby bears, make some noise while you are hiking, don't keep food in your tent, etc. You know the rules of thumb. If you are not trained in how to shoot a charging bear, then a gun probably won't save you anyway. We really need to start injecting some reality in to the whole gun mythos...

          July 22, 2012 at 2:50 am | Report abuse |
    • Peace

      You mean only the rich or the criminal can kill.

      July 22, 2012 at 2:19 am | Report abuse |
  48. Jay

    Yes! Most Definitely we can stop Massive loss of life. It's not what the "Soft" American Public, or ACLU would want you to say BUT.....IF we shot each person who crossed the line, or if we had swift consequence (capitol punishment) laws which were actually carried out, as in the old days; Then Yes, It would serve as Grave reminder to these "Crazies" that although insane, do they really want to chance losing their own lives? As it stands right now; They do these terrible things knowing they will live to see another day.

    July 22, 2012 at 1:41 am | Report abuse |
  49. 2sdfsdfsfsdf

    You can never stop it. Outlaw every gun, be all lovey dovey with everyone's feelings. Strip search everyone 50 times a day, anytime they do anything. Spend every penny on security. And you STILL will NEVER stop it.

    Because all it takes is one deranged person, and you will have bodies on the ground.

    As tragic as these things are, they are going to happen. Tho you are more likely to be struck by lightning then be a victim of one of these people. So, live your life, and stop worrying about it.

    No its not the video games. Ive been playing violent games for the last 20 years, and somehow i havent managed so much as a parking ticket.... I dont get in fights, i dont drink... Its really not hard.... These things were happening before video games existed, they will happen long after video games fall out of fashion.

    No its not the guns, the nation with the highest gun per capita also has one of the lowest crime rates. If anything these whackos might think twice if everyone was packing.(not that i think assult weapons should be legal...). I dont own a gun(other then a bb gun) but i completely support peoples right to own them.

    July 22, 2012 at 1:36 am | Report abuse |
  50. gdaym8

    No ONE has the answer. But, ALL of us....hold the answer. We're just not asking the right question...

    July 22, 2012 at 1:30 am | Report abuse |
  51. Stimpy

    I own a 9mm pistol but not an assault rifle. I am willing to be 2nd best in the arms race but I don't wish to be completely disarmed. The police, as evidenced here, don't or can't prevent all crimes. They just help clean up afterwards. It's a strange situation we find ourselves in. Hi capacity semi-automatic assault rifles don't make a lot of sense to me either. Shotguns are also cruel and nasty. Like all other issues things are highly polarized in these here United States.

    July 22, 2012 at 1:19 am | Report abuse |
  52. Clifford

    These maniacs were formerly locked away in asylums for their entire lives. Now, the Liberal court system and Psychiatry profession wants them "mainstreamed" out of goodwilled intentions ..... Only problem: they are putting these crazed sharks into the "main stream" of our Society filled with peaceful, unarmed guppies,

    July 22, 2012 at 1:19 am | Report abuse |
    • Joseph

      Clifford, you're an idiot. NONE of the mass shooters in the last 10 years have been turned back into society from any mental institutions. Get your head out of your ass.

      July 22, 2012 at 1:51 am | Report abuse |
  53. David

    Stop publishing the names of these shooters, and their motive for the shootings is likely to disappear. All this speculation about motives and putting the shooter's face on the front page of the news is exactly the response they desire.

    All media outlets should implement a policy of refusing to publish the names or any personal details of mass shooters.

    July 22, 2012 at 1:18 am | Report abuse |
  54. TheThinker1958

    they can't be stop, but you can control people from buying a rifle every week. or the amount of ammunition. you might need 10 bullets to defend yourself. This crazy guy had 6,000.

    July 22, 2012 at 1:16 am | Report abuse |
  55. Seriously.

    It's bizarre, really, that when this happens people call it "senseless" and rack their brains about how to "stop the violence." Here's an idea. How about if we stop glorifying violence every single day, particularly to young men. How about if we stop telling young men that it's "cool" to jump out of helicopters and blow up villages full of women and children and grandparents? How about if we stop mocking people who want peace and object to our culture of violence?

    This crime wasn't senseless – it makes perfect sense. Our society creates these people, and it creates all the murderers, rapists, and violent criminals we see around us. We have more violent crime than pretty much any other western nation. If you want that to change, you have to change the society.

    July 22, 2012 at 1:05 am | Report abuse |
    • Stimpy

      Thanks for the lecture, thou seriously exalted morally superior being. I wish I were half as morally upright and liberal as thou.

      July 22, 2012 at 1:10 am | Report abuse |
    • Cristy

      I totally agree with this – not to mention that many teenagers are allowed to spend hours playing violent video games – When does the line between reality and fantasy become blurred for those borderline personalities?

      July 22, 2012 at 1:18 am | Report abuse |
      • Ken

        video games? you're going there ? Video games do not create vilolent people. Vilolent people play them as an outlet. Because a I play a nuclear war sim I'm more prone to blow up the world,come on ?!?!!

        July 22, 2012 at 1:21 am | Report abuse |
    • Ken

      change to what? A dictatortship?

      July 22, 2012 at 1:18 am | Report abuse |
    • Jay

      You are a genius.

      July 22, 2012 at 1:30 am | Report abuse |
    • Oh my you are an idiot


      Original post: "It's bizarre, really, that when this happens people call it "senseless" and rack their brains about how to "stop the violence." Here's an idea. How about if we stop glorifying violence every single day, particularly to young men. How about if we stop telling young men that it's "cool" to jump out of helicopters and blow up villages full of women and children and grandparents? How about if we stop mocking people who want peace and object to our culture of violence?

      This crime wasn't senseless – it makes perfect sense. Our society creates these people, and it creates all the murderers, rapists, and violent criminals we see around us. We have more violent crime than pretty much any other western nation. If you want that to change, you have to change the society."

      Response: This guy has never jumped out of a helicopter killing innocents. BTW we do not jump out of helicopters everyday killing women, children, and grandparents. Sometimes it makes me sick to serve people like you. So that you can continually be the scourge of this country and crap on the folks that give you the very right to say what you have in your post. You sir/ma'am are the reason our society is "spineless". You are the reason people do not stand up against somebody like this. You are the hippy that preaches peace and love when the reality is completely different. You are the reason our society has the potential to be "steamrolled" by a government that wants to take your rights away. This about this. Imagine I am the government: @Seriously You have the right to remain silent... Why, you may ask? You are not allowed to speak the way you just did. You make me sick. If you don't like the way we do things then LEAVE MY COUNTRY!!!!!

      July 22, 2012 at 4:34 am | Report abuse |
  56. Bill P.

    How many more people have to die at the hands of deranged gunman in America before people wake up to the dpravity fostered by the NRA? Personnally, i have seen enough, from Charles Whitman on top of the U of Texas Austin library tower to this lastet mass murder. Give me a break: there is only one reason for a private citizen in America to have a semi or automatic rifle. That is to kill people. You don't go deer hunting with a machine gun. It is NOT a recreational weapon. These guns should be confiscated. Rather than spending billions trying to stop drug traffic, we should legalize many recreational drugs and spend the money purging this country of automatic weapons.

    July 22, 2012 at 1:03 am | Report abuse |
    • Ken

      The point for normal people bear arms and most pointetly millitary arms is so the president can call upon them for the common defense. Also it's so a government can't become so evil as not to be overthrown. What the problem here is not guns but mental health. If we treated people with these disorders before they get this bad we'd be way ahead. Criminals will still be able to get them despite any ban. That will leave good people defenseless.

      July 22, 2012 at 1:15 am | Report abuse |
    • Realist

      Yea like your insignificant voice is heard. Automatic weapons are already illegal Einstein. An AR15 is a rifle, there are many rifles out there like it that are Semi automatic. Handguns can be used the same way. I have a 27 Round Mag for my Glock 40 Cal. Your notion to legalize drugs is completely stu pid. Just in case you haven't heard he was a progressive thinking Liberal like yourself. So was the guy that shot up the Republican congresswoman. Maybe we need to audit and watch Liberals, which most of whom don't even know why they call themselves Lib to begin with lol. 2nd Amendment is not arguable. These things would happen regardless of guns or not, people turn crazy sometimes. It is legal to own a gun, and it is legal in many states to carry concealed like I have. Concealed carry could have helped this situation. There is a reason they keep passing these laws county by county. No matter how you want to dice it, guns are here in this world, ATF screens the best they can, but people simply are nuts sometimes..

      July 22, 2012 at 1:19 am | Report abuse |
      • dm from canada

        iIt is a true point, that crazy people will always try to carry out violent crimes. but give them easy access to guns n ammo can never be a wise thing. this is an old debate in america, and in canada where im from..you can buy guns but they're alot harder to get. it seems that the shear fact that this piece of crap was able to purchase a gas mask and thousands of rounds of ammo without question, points to a serious problem with guns in the states. let people have them but not just anyone. make mandatory that a gun purchase must be first justified and then proper training and interviewing of the person wanting to purchase them. just my thought.

        July 22, 2012 at 1:39 am | Report abuse |
        • Oldeye

          The mental cases are the hardest to screen out because they do not commit crimes
          often and when they do, it's mostly terminal. There just is no way to detect and control
          this problem. Mental or not, any crazy gunman must be stopped ASAP and it takes people
          to stop them. There just is no other way. Gun control is not the answer. Trained CCW
          among all of us is the answer. I know I will not go out meekly.

          July 22, 2012 at 6:01 am | Report abuse |
      • NV

        Are you a realist or a parochial in your views. Perhaps you may need to travel around the world a bit. I could give you several countries where it is illegal to own a gun especially an automatic weapon and the violence and murder rate in these countries are very low. And these countries do have criminals and crazy people – its not unique to USA. These countries have had weapons at one time but the laws were crafted to make it illegal and make the punishments very severe that even buying the arms illegally for criminals is difficult. As for the second amendment it is certainly arguable. Here's the text:
        "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."
        Why do we need a well regulated militia of ordinary citizens today given we have the marines, navy seals, air force and national guards to name a few. If the desire is to curtail the power of the federal government then it is easily achieved through elections and certainly not individuals armed with guns who stands no chance against the marines, navy seals etc. And arguing in favor of this point then I should have the right to buy a nuclear weapon or develop it. Would you feel safe if I had a nuclear weapon?.

        July 22, 2012 at 3:17 am | Report abuse |
    • George

      Ah Bill.......Fully automatic weapons are already illegal to buy or own unless you have a special Federal license. There are over 20,000 state local and Federal gun control laws, and we still have violent people that will use guns to do harm. Switzerland on the other hand has an even higher per capita gun ownership than the US, and VERY LOW rates of gun crimes. Perhaps we should seek to emulate their laws, as they seem to be working quite well for the Swiss!

      July 22, 2012 at 1:22 am | Report abuse |
    • Matthew

      To the people who say more gun laws will prevent these kinds of crimes: Please remind me about how criminals obey laws. This nation has spent MASSIVE amounts of money and other resources over the last 30 years to enforce drug laws. Guess what? Drugs are a bigger problem today - especially among young people - than ever before. What makes anyone (with half a brain) honestly believe that gun control would turn out any differently from drug control?

      To the people talking about the 2nd Amendment: "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." Notice what's missing from that? There's nothing about food. There's nothing about personal or household safety. It's talking about protecting freedom. The founding fathers recognized that throughout history - in fact, even before guns existed - the first step of any would-be tyrant has always been to disarm the people. Their own fight for freedom would have been impossible without weapons. It was for this reason that the Second Amendment was written and why it was only behind freedom of speech in importance. In fact, the majority of the amendments within the Bill of Rights serve a very specific purpose: They short circuit the many ways in which tyrants have gained or held onto power. This is why things like assault rifles DO fall under the protection of the 2nd Amendment. Should they be regulated? Certainly. But they must not be outlawed.

      July 22, 2012 at 1:48 am | Report abuse |
    • Of Sain Mind

      Bill P, we need to purge this country of people like you! Brainless. There were way more mass killings in our past then there are now. Do the names Ghengis khan, hitler etc come to mind. They killed a lot more people. Egyptian, Roman, and other era's all had way more mass killings. Did you see them outlaw bows and arrow, swords, clubs etc...Nope they sure didn't. If somebody wants to kill somebody they will find a way! Take guns away and they will use knives. Take knives away and they will use bows and arrows, you gonna take those away too?
      How about cars Bill! We have way more deaths by drunk drivers every year than we do mass killings by guns. Are you going to take cars away too Bill??? It's common sense! "Parenting" it all starts at home? If you don't hang out with your kid, teach them to respect others, treat others how you wanted to be treated and or abused, neglected children this is what happens. Leave your kid alone to video games and movies not appropriate they don't learn about how the real world really operates! Wake up buddy! It's not the gun that pulls the trigger. It's not the gun telling people to kill people. It's that person that makes his own decisions good or bad. Freedom of choice.

      July 22, 2012 at 1:52 am | Report abuse |
    • BeverlyNC

      I agree. Let people have their hunting guns and other sporting guns. NO ONE but the police and mlitary should have any assault rifle or automatic weapon with 60 bullet clips.Their only purpose is to kill people and no citizen needs that kind of firepower. It is a recipe for this kind of violence. Republicans and the NRA need to be brought down on this issue. We need a ban on all military style weapons. Make them a controlled substance like drugs and felonies to own. Hold the manufacturers accountable and the NRA accountable. The NRA is the perfect example of why lobbyists should be illegal, prosecuted and sent to jail for buying Congress – the Congress member too. It should considered bribery and corruption. We can end this if we stood up to these gun nuts.

      July 22, 2012 at 2:39 am | Report abuse |
    • Robert

      We should spend the money deporting tyrants to our constitution and our bill of rights... people like you bill...

      July 22, 2012 at 2:45 am | Report abuse |
      • rogue351

        Remind me again exactly what kind of weapons the people had when the bill of rights was written ? They sure didn't have tear gas grenades, semi auto shot guns. And they most certainly had no idea that we would have either or the would have written it differently. The NRA had used the second amendment to make billions over the years. Gun don't kill people, people kill people. That may be true, but what is also true is that people with guns kill a hell of alot more people. You see it is a matter of perspective. And the NRA has crafted your perspective over years and year of indoctrination. I have heard it before, the only way they will get my gun is if the pry it from my cold dead hands.... Blaaaa blaa. It is a gun not a liver. You can live without it. By no means does owning a gun makes you a better American.

        Raise the price of bullets to $1000 each, make people who have guns accountable for owning them by paying a tax every 3 months. Make gun owners who's guns are stolen responsible for the crimes the gun may be involved in. No need to ban anything. Make buying a gun a three year process. You are correct it is your right and if you can follow these rules then you can have your gun. It is all a matter of persective.

        July 22, 2012 at 3:11 am | Report abuse |
        • Ken

          Really. How many guns were used in Ok City? How about on 9/11?

          July 22, 2012 at 4:28 am | Report abuse |
    • Ken

      Come and get it Bill. I will be waiting.

      July 22, 2012 at 4:27 am | Report abuse |
  57. Noyfb

    Uh no, how can you stop an individual that you don't even know exists from killing a bunch of people out of the blue? Only a naive left winger would ask a question like this. Unless you can read 320 million peoples minds 24/7 and pinpoint mass murder thoughts and act instantly there is nothing anyone can do and never will.

    July 22, 2012 at 1:01 am | Report abuse |
  58. WHHoward

    Why do we allow people to buy 100-round magazines and assault rifles? A 5-shot revolver would limit the carnage.

    July 22, 2012 at 12:56 am | Report abuse |
  59. tigerpawraw

    "Former profiler Jim Clemente believes there's very little society can do to put an end to all acts of senseless violence"

    REALLY, CNN? Thanks for that enlightening bit of info, and wasting 2 minutes of my life reading this idiotic article.

    July 22, 2012 at 12:55 am | Report abuse |
  60. bbqummhmm

    People carry guns for the illusion of control. People commit mass killings to give them the illusion of control. Ironically, the previous Batman movie touches on the subject. What if there is no such thing as control?

    July 22, 2012 at 12:55 am | Report abuse |
  61. Bob B

    No they can't. A bomb, a gun, a car I can go on, but if someone wants to kill people they can't be stopped.

    July 22, 2012 at 12:53 am | Report abuse |
    • Ken

      right they can't when it's too late.You have to get to them before they get there.We have to treat mental health.I bet donuts to dollars that 99% of these guys would have asked for help very early if was available,affordable, and the stigma was not there.

      July 22, 2012 at 1:25 am | Report abuse |
  62. JT

    Just as the right to free speech (1st Amendment) is not unlimited (i.e. slander or shouting fire when there is no fire). the right to keep and bear arms (2nd Amendment) should not be unlimited. NRA (National RIFLE Association) should realize that a rifle can protect the home and be used for hunting. Assault weapons and pistols belong in the hands of the police and military. We can thank the NRA and others for these two facts. 1994 study on gun related deaths per 100,000 – United States 14.24 (highest in the world) and England and Wales 0.41 (one of the lowest of 36 richest countries) – http://www.guncite.com/cnngunde.html, Needless to say, England has substantially tighter gun control laws.

    July 22, 2012 at 12:52 am | Report abuse |
    • tigerpawraw

      If police are holding guns, I want the right to hold guns too. If all police were trustworthy, intelligent, responsible human beings, maybe I'd change that sentiment. But obviously, that is patently untrue. I'm not saying all police are unintelligent, power-hungry, unfair individuals, but I've met a few, and I'm sure many people can attest to that as well.

      July 22, 2012 at 12:59 am | Report abuse |
    • George

      If private citizens can't own or carry assault weapons and pistols, then why would police need them? Who would the police need to use these weapons against?

      July 22, 2012 at 1:25 am | Report abuse |
    • Ken

      Take my guns away and I'll build even meaner stuff. You can't put the genie backin the bottle.

      July 22, 2012 at 1:27 am | Report abuse |
    • Of Sain Mind

      JT, gee I wonder where those stats came from. The Brady website perhaps. Or an organization like theirs? I have an assault rifle. Have had one for 5 years now. I haven't thought about killing people. BECAUSE I respect life, have common sense, and I'm just not crazy!! I would rather protect life. If I was in that theater that night the bad guy wouldn't have hurt and killed so many people? He would have been stopped! Law enforcements arrival at best would have been 3-5 minutes.
      Even if the guy had a sword in a crowded theater he would have been able to slice up a good 10-15 people before Law enforcement arrived or somebody tackled him! You going to ban swords too!

      July 22, 2012 at 2:03 am | Report abuse |
  63. Noyfb

    Banning guns will also do nothing, guns are illegal in Mexico and in Venezuela and their gun homicides are several times more than ours and we have a bigger population, in fact all evidence suggests that gun bans will dramatically increase shootings and murders. Potential shooters become actual shooters when they know there targets are not armed. Very bad idea to ban guns.

    July 22, 2012 at 12:49 am | Report abuse |
    • Kha noon

      "Potential shooters become actual shooters when they know there targets are not armed." I disargee.
      If the robber knows that you're armed,then he(she) would shoot you first then take your money.There will be no demand like "give me your money or I will kill you".
      He would wear a bulletproof vest before commit the crime.Are you wearing your vest and carring gun 24hrs a day?

      July 24, 2012 at 10:59 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3