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. jim

    YEP easy....

    Currently in Aurora, Colorado, where the shooting took place, it is already

    unlawful to carry a concealed "dangerous weapon," discharge firearms, unless by

    law enforcement on duty or on shooting range, and have loaded firearm in motor


    Yet these laws were unable to stop James Holmes.

    Crime rates alone of cities such as Chicago and Washington D.C. prove that gun

    bans only increase crime. The D.C. police response rate is eight minutes; most

    crimes are done in less than one. Gun bans create a trouble-free world for

    criminals considering no one can defend themselves. If I were ever to face a

    situation like this, I would want to be prepared.

    I cannot help but think, if one person in that audience was carrying a gun with

    them, that person could have saved lives. Unfortunately – despite what some of the

    Left have said – this tragedy is an example of the importance of our Second

    Amendment Rights.

    July 21, 2012 at 8:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • derwood

      An armed society is a polite one.

      July 21, 2012 at 8:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • NZV

      There appears to be a John Wayne culture around here. Everyone on the right think that they could easily have taken the man down if they had a gun. The fact that you have a gun does not make you a sharpshooter especially in a dark crowd filled with smoke and chaos. If that were true then when we send the boys to Iraq all we need to do was give them a gun – why give them any rigorous training.

      How many criminals do you think actually goes around shooting in this manner?. So the argument that criminals will have the guns if there is a ban and hence crime will increase is ludicrous. There are several countries out there that have stricter gun controls and the crime per capita is far less. And these countries do have terrorists and crazy people – its not unique here.

      And for those who talk about the second amendment and its text its open to interpretation. Here's the actual 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".
      This was written at a time when all one had was a musket. What exactly is a well regulated militia – marines, navy seals, national guards – why is arming an individual with no regulation justified now. Using the same argument I would like to buy a nuclear weapon – do you feel secure now?.

      July 22, 2012 at 9:55 am | Report abuse |
  2. whosit

    Very easy, tell you local and congressional "reps", either you face up to the NRA, or start looking for a new line of work.
    I don't think butt lazy americans are up to the task, so this is my last op, till the next mass shooting.

    July 21, 2012 at 8:30 pm | Report abuse |
  3. djpk69

    I didn't vote for Obama. He doesn't matter right now ?????? What can / could he do? I'll keep my guns and shoot my 2000 rounds at TRAP every year. Guns lead to shootings like alchohol leads to ??? Give a SICKO a key and he may kill 3-4 people. Give a SICKO a tree branch and he may kill 5-6 people. Mental health is the problem / solution.

    July 21, 2012 at 8:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • whosit

      Yeah, but you can run away from a tree branch, dip.

      July 21, 2012 at 8:31 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Sachmo

    Well the guy is a certifiable sicko, but the reason we debate is far removed from reality, these kinds of guys (white anglo-saxon) are everywhere. how do you prevent society from itself?

    July 21, 2012 at 8:25 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Artemis Prime

    Looking at the Colorado Batman shooter's level of education, he was over his head in debt. With the prospect of failing out, he would be an indentured servant for life on a fixed income with no way of becoming self-sufficient. A living wage is not possible as the debt collectors garnish 25% his wages and confiscate all of his tax return.

    You can't stop things like this with a ban on weapons because anything can be used as a weapon when you run amok. Even if guns were banned and the shooter could not get weapons.. he could use whatever else is available... he could have come in with a baseball bat and did the same thing. In the hands of a willfull person, a baseball bat can be a deadly weapon; especially if you know where to hit a human being. Being a medical student specializing in neurology, I'm sure he would know exactly where he could do a lot of damage.

    Running Amok is a known phenomenon and happens to the best of the best of humanity when put in mental situations such as insurmountable student loan debt without bankruptcy protection. You want to fix this.. return bankruptcy protection for borrowers of federal and private student loans.

    I'm not making excuses for the guy. I'm giving you a little insight on one possible reason why he did it.

    As for banning guns... the movie theater and that area of Colorado was a gun free zone already. That means that banning guns doesn't work. If citizens were legally allowed to carry firearms in the theater, I believe there would be less than 12 deaths there because at least there would be someone there to fire back. Instead, the gun ban law created more victims.

    We need to return bankruptcy protection to student loan borrowers. This is the only way to help people in this situation.

    July 21, 2012 at 8:22 pm | Report abuse |
  6. bullied

    Although it was a long time ago, I was bullied in grade school and high school, having said that, now that I am much older, wiser, have children and grandchildren, I tend to believe the FBI pro-filers when it comes to why someone would do such a thing. These kind of people are born nutcases. I don't think outside influences play a major part in this happening.

    July 21, 2012 at 8:19 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Claudia, Houston, Tx

    George Zimmerman, the killer of Trayvon Martin, would probably say "it was God's plan" just like God pulled the trigger.

    July 21, 2012 at 8:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Eric

      Trayvon was a thug and was beating the hell out of zimmerman.... that's a prime example of how the gun saved Zimmerman's life. Trayvon got exactly what he deserved, it's all coming out in the papers. Zimm willb e vindicated, no question.

      July 21, 2012 at 9:21 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Naomi Call

    I would like to feel, truly feel, that those whose lives were taken today will make a lasting difference. I would like to hear the president I voted into office say something more than sweet words that do not console, or inspire me. I’d like to hear some movie and game producers take a stand for peace and transformation, and choose to stop filling the minds of our young adults with games that reward them for killing and other violent acts.

    Film is one of the most powerful mediums we have for expression. I hope every filmmaker who has contributed violent films to our society is pausing in self reflection. Was the money worth it? Am I making a valuable contribution to our youth, or people, of our nation? What if I were to join other filmmakers and put our financial earnings, resources and energy into creating a conscious shift?

    What would happen then? Hollywood filmmakers are able to create a lasting difference. I do believe we need more strict gun registration and enforcement, it will make a difference, especially when we stop feeding our children violence every day in a multiplicity of venues. The NRA is considered beyond controllable or changeable. So, who is it that is controlling this country?

    The Mayans believed that 2012 would mark the end of the world. It is time for an end to the world as we currently know it. We can all rise together and choose to herald in higher consciousness. Let’s work together to make what we used to think as impossible, possible. Let’s have the lives of those massacred individuals mean something in their passing. What do we have to loose except more innocent lives? We can be entertained in other ways, constructive ways, and children could learn again how to play outside.

    We need gun control in our “democracy” from both sides of a government that continues to become weaker, and globally disrespected. We need parents to stop buying violent games for their children and allowing the viewing of violent shows or movies. When I raised my children, television was not an option at young ages, at all.

    We all need to make changes within ourselves, conscious, wise choices for ourselves, our children, our communities and our planet. Our future together depends on it.

    July 21, 2012 at 8:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dennis

      First of all the Mayans didn't believe the world would end in 2012. It is just as far as they made their calendar. Second, guns don't commit mass murders. Spoons don't make people fat. Had there been a couple of legally licensed concealed handgun carriers in that theater there would have been fewer deaths.

      July 21, 2012 at 8:20 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Dan J

    People can debate gun control all day in regards to this tragedy. But the real debate should be about mental illness.

    July 21, 2012 at 8:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • D. Darko

      That is only half of the argument. Any attempt to gloss over the ubiquity of guns is foolish. You see this happening in Australia? Or Japan? Or Britain? Or dozens of other countries? No. Why oh why do you think that is?

      July 21, 2012 at 8:20 pm | Report abuse |
      • AK

        Because they don't shoot each other. The guns are there. I spent 3 military years in Europe immersed in their gun culture. I could get things there – real, blackmarket automatic weapons, leftovers from two world wars and a Cold War – I would not know where to begin to touch here.

        I have a .22 rifle I inherited from my deceased brother. He bought it in 1956, over the counter in a hardware store, in New Jersey. He was 15. No permit. No recordkeeping. No background check. Just $25 of paper route money. Now...given my observation about Europe above, what has changed between 1956 , when a 15 YO boy could buy a long gun in Straus Hardware, Bergenfield, NJ, and today?

        Talk gun control all you want. It'll get you nowhere, no matter what laws you pass. You may get results when you talk culture.

        July 21, 2012 at 8:34 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Dan J

    The experts are correct: the scientific consensus among psychiatrists and sociologists is that sociopaths and mass murderers seem to be a product of the environment and genetics. Psycopaths are generally strictly genetic and exceedingly rare. So to answer the question of whether or not society plays a role, the answer is yes and no. It is possible that some of these murderers may be curtailed if they were in a better environment. Don't bother looking for warning signs, however, as there rarely are any. As far as gun control goes, I can guarantee that if these people are hellbent on wreaking havoc, they will make due with whatever supplies are available.
    It reminds me of the uproar over Natural Born Killers. All the copycats that obsessed over the film were messed up way before the film came out. Maybe the movie nudged them over the edge, but if it wasn't the movie, it would have been something else.

    July 21, 2012 at 8:06 pm | Report abuse |
  11. djpk69

    Good Night America. I'm a NRA lifetimer. I own many shotguns and 15,000 rounds. I would NEVER contemplate doing what happened. That's the problem......"contemplating killing 100 people". You can take away guns (not really) ...but you can't take away the SICKNESS of someone BENT on KILLING. As a former teacher....I would look at our society and parents FIRST..............then, PARENTS !! Teach your children WELL !

    July 21, 2012 at 8:05 pm | Report abuse |
  12. chookeh

    I also find it strange that so-called "suicide" bombers, terrorists, and Holmes-like types, go after civilians all the time. You have to wonder why the Globalists, who are behind much of the sickness in the world (all their false flags, war-mongering, and looting of nations by their Central Banking systems), NEVER get it.

    I'm just curios why?

    July 21, 2012 at 8:05 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Chris C.

    Good luck banning guns. It will work as well as banning drugs. See this:

    July 21, 2012 at 8:05 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Sal


    July 21, 2012 at 8:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bud Glass

      It is very unlikely that all the media will cooperate not to publish names, photos and life histories of perpetrators and detailed information about the attacks. Some will stop, but many will continue. Competition will keep much of the information available. If a newspaper or web site is thinking about not publishing these details, they know people will just go to other newspapers or websites to get the information. So, they may be reluctant to stop publishing the info. There are thousands of media outlets and it isn't possible to get them all to stop.

      Currently, the public has the right to know and there is Freedom of the Press. The only way to stop this information from being published is for a change in the Constitution that will allow the government to ban the information from being publicized.

      July 21, 2012 at 8:28 pm | Report abuse |
  15. mlblogssargeanton

    No. They can never be stopped. They'll only become more frequent because we don't execute murderers; we psychologize them instead. We'd rather know WHY they did it, than have people stop doing it.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:59 pm | Report abuse |
  16. meemee

    Doesn't it always seem to be some guy who's been bullied and isolated? Maybe more than condemnation and trying to do impossible things like do away with guns and Second Amendment rights is in order. Like some of that famous thinking out of the box? The best way to solve a problem or cure a disease is to look at the cause. I don't see too many people doing that. Also, as long as people are using "God" to escape from facing things it is also more likely that we won't find the cause.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:55 pm | Report abuse |
  17. chookeh

    I don't think these can be stopped until our world has had enough of violence. Obviously humans are a violent animal, but the entire planet is violent when you think of it: animals eating animals, violent storms, etc....But I think it is only certain types of monkeys that show satisfaction and enjoyment in doing violence, Like humans.

    We want to send a message to our children of peace, but then we cheer on overseas slaughters and invasions, or talk about "wiping Iran off the Map" or something sick like that. We laud as successful businessmen selling the most sophisticated weapons all over the planet and call ourselves "civilized", YET we don't seem to have the wisdom to reign in these weapons. I mean, if we were a civilized advanced race of beings then I highly suspect we would not have these weapons, but would be using the TECHNOLOGY to teach each human how to provide for themselves in ways of energy and food, ETC.

    None of our leaders have any business condemning this young sick F of a guy, when they are deliberately bombing civilians all over the planet. Again, what message does this send our young. GROW UP America, and to the rest of the world you need to grow up too.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • Redeye Dog

      I believe your first line says it all. Well said.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:59 pm | Report abuse |
  18. morningtime1

    Explain this: Europe and Canada do not have so frequent mass shootings! What is so different about the US? Gatorade!

    July 21, 2012 at 7:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • chookeh

      I know Canada has had some very violent mass killings and other violent crimes. You forget Canada only has about 1/10th the population of the U.S.

      Also, notice how there is a movie (watch the trailer at youtube) made in 2012 called "God Bless America" about this man that gets sick of everyone and goes on a shooting spree....this is being glorified in the movie. Hollywood makes "eNTERtainment" out of this creepy stuff and millions go watch it while stuffing faces with popcorn.

      Canada just had a shooting, btw. Also, remember the horrible one that Engineering class where the guy mowed down all the Females in the class?

      Also, it is sick that the FBI has been setting up people with weapons and encourages them to commit a terror attack and then they arrest the people. This is common knowledge and FBI always admits to it. Whats to say that some of these horrendous "gun" crimes are not staged? The Government is always trying to stress how bad guns are and encouraging people to be for banning guns. NOBODY should ever want this as bad as things get because it is common for governments to do the most slaughtering of civilians, and don't think for a minute they won't do that to Americans. They already got Drones up in the air...next they will be bombing US citizens with them.

      July 21, 2012 at 8:00 pm | Report abuse |
      • John

        Don't worry the NRA is on the case! They will acquire a few of their own drones to combat the US Government!

        July 21, 2012 at 8:06 pm | Report abuse |
      • bradshaw

        The shooting in Montreal was on December 6, 1989 at the École Polytechnique. It was over 21 years ago and yes it was horrible. Please don't compare Canada to what happens in the US. I'm afraid that the US is influencing Canada, if there is any link at all be between the two.

        July 22, 2012 at 3:09 pm | Report abuse |
  19. djpk69

    Amazingly someone posted that most of "our" mass murderers are "white" ?? I'm thinking that something about "white" education/ free wheeling/ demonic thinking is to mis. Look at the last 5/10......."White" ? I'm white and wondering why these "KIDS" are so F@@- UP. Too much Free time / playstation / and TV ??

    July 21, 2012 at 7:48 pm | Report abuse |
  20. Andrew Newitt

    I don't know if anyone will read this, but here goes. Our prayers go out to the souls of the dead and those who were wounded and all their families and friends. This was a fiendish act, perpertrated on totally innocent people. They didn't deserve this and the culprit deserves whatever man and God have in store for him. NOW. Here's what I ALSO think. This mass killing was the act of a deranged person. What goes on nightly in the areas of south Chicago, WATTS, Detroit city, St. Louis inner city, and many other large cities is the act of a deranged CULTURE. The people, mostly black but also white, who inflict similar crimes against humanity EVERY NIGHT are worse – I think – then the acts of one deranged person. (altho I know there have been several of these mass killings and there are more than one deranged person, but again they don't match up numbers wise with what goes on in inner cities) The killers in this deranged culture do everything wrong. They deny the value of education, they deny the value of working hard to help themselves and help their heirs, and they deny the value of being a father and husband. They do it all wrong, blame others for their plight and they are getting worse not better as a culture. Granted, some get out. And some stay in without wanting to, but not seeing how to get out. But it isn't fair to look at a deranged person(s) and not examine a deranged culture. Why is this happening now? Why isn't all the government work and charitable work not working for them? And if your answer is we need to do more for this culture, you are part of the problem too. Only they and their leaders can get themselves on the right path. It won't be fast and it won't be easy, but if it doesn't happen with them and their leaders it won't happen. We can't do enough for them with charity and government can't do enough for them to make a change. Sorry, but all the bleeding hearts in the world won't change them.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • meemee

      I have a neighbor who told me how praying got her a job last week, yet God let this guy kill all these people. Looks like your God has some screwy priorities.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • noodle logic

      you give mankind way too much credit ...it's NOT an evolved species ...YET
      when people (you) stop observing things that make them (you) unconformable then they disappear <- easy peasy lemon squeezy!

      July 21, 2012 at 7:55 pm | Report abuse |
  21. C

    No, they can never be stopped. This also includes bomb attacks which are even more deadly.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • morningtime1

      Can never be stopped? But this type of shootings hardly ever occurs in Europe, Canada, India or Asia... Only in the US (at this scale). So you bet it can be stopped. Even the Canadians can stop it.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • noodle logic

      ...of course they can be brought to a halt ....start teaching ALL humanity "Basic Self Knowledge" courses so they will understand themselves. This should be "core learning" throughout all grades of school.

      July 21, 2012 at 8:04 pm | Report abuse |
  22. noodle logic

    Mass shootings: Can they be stopped?
    yes... stop being in mass!

    July 21, 2012 at 7:30 pm | Report abuse |
  23. jeffy domer

    It's all that damn obamas fault

    July 21, 2012 at 7:29 pm | Report abuse |
  24. Al

    Stepping on my 2nd amendment rights is not the answer. I can have a thousand guns and a million rounds of ammo and not ever think of harming a soul.

    Perhaps we should ban violent video games. Maybe we should ban violent movies and should make it illegal for masses of people to congregate where violence is glorified on the screen.

    Perhaps people with compromised mental conditions getting violent ideas from the media in their heads are the problem?

    July 21, 2012 at 7:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • morningtime1

      Perhaps if selling guns wasn't so profitable a business, Average Joe wouldn't get his hands on a gun. Oh yeah, let's repeat the NRA dogma: "Guns don't kill people, index fngers do! Blame the guy's fingers!"

      July 21, 2012 at 8:00 pm | Report abuse |
  25. Reality Check written to the Sheeple

    Let's all overlook that this guy WASN'T a Gun Toting GOP Tea bagger as you call him but an Obama supporter. Let's also overlook the incident in Florida where a concealed carrying elderly man fended off two robbers in the internet cafe. I think he along with the guy that shot the Arizona Senator may very well be planted to start all this crap about gun control since we are in the 4th quarter here that the Obamination wants to push Gun control. You sheeple continue to believe that he is saving our country by thumbing his nose at our Constitution. And one more thing, if you think that REAL Criminals are going to surrender their guns along with law abiding citizens, I have a bridge in New York to sell your lame asses.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • noodle logic

      you might want to dial back that THC level a bit sparky.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hiway

      TO REALITY CHECK RE: SHEEPLE And you know its Obama because ... Need I remind you there were several such incidents under Republican administrations. And neither my mother or father had anyting to do with sheep sexually – if yours did you have my sympathy.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Boohuncus

      Yawn. Your kind of tired hackneyed rants are getting old. The only sheep is in your mirror, fella. You're probably a blibbering bible beater to boot. God and guns, boys! Now that's a holy franchise, ain't it? Guns 'r good, thinkin's bad. Get God, get a gun, and get righteous! Meanwhile the gun violence goes on unfettered by anything so useless as linear reasoning....

      July 21, 2012 at 7:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • longshot

      and the sheeple who send hundreds of millions of dollars to the NRA (so they can fight to keep allowing people on the terror watch list to buy guns) are not sheeple...right, just keep supporting the NRA and the Koch brothers and big corporations and Romney....and everyone else is Sheeple.....

      July 21, 2012 at 7:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • burnz

      I have to ask, how did this maniac get 6K rounds of ammunition + 4 guns, and body armor in 60 days without talking to a psychiatrist.

      (Canadian here) AMERICA! If you want guns, that's cool, but at least make sure they're all registered and that everyone who owns a ****ing assault rifle has a sane mind. Also, most illegal guns are STOLEN (or sold) from/by legal gun owners, if the legal owners had to sign a piece of paper and talk to a shrink for an hour, maybe they wouldn't let their guns get into the hands of the deranged.

      Some people are saying "what if there was someone armed who knew how to use a gun in there?" The Eaton Centre Shootings, just showed what happens when you bring a second gun into a crowd.

      I hope this joker get r****d in prison.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • frhoads

      Your tin foil hat is a little tight.

      July 21, 2012 at 8:12 pm | Report abuse |
  26. Woody

    In the U.S. We love to hide from reality and keep our heads in a 2000 year old book . Only through education to the real world can people try to keep themselves safe knowing there are no guarantees in life .

    July 21, 2012 at 7:25 pm | Report abuse |
  27. Antoine(Canada)

    Americans are a joke and not too intelligent. We could call them a bit on the stupid side when it comes to the guns. There is no liberty in owning a gun whatsoever, it's a danger you have to handle in order not to do a stupid thing once your emotions get in the way. But that's not what I TRULY FIND STUPID. I can buy the fact that someone has a gun : but why some people are aloud to purchase mass destruction guns, used in wars, automatic weapons you do not even need to reload, weapons that can carry 100 ammos and maybe more, other than to make sure they can get out there and mass murder people ? Don't tell me it's to defend themselves, don't tell me it's a hobby! If you want to shoot as a hobby, keep these weapons locked in a private place where you use them, a shooting club or something. Why do people need these ? It's time the government take responsability and stop using liberty and amendments or crap like this because they can't protect their people... Nobody should die because a lobby like the NRA (who only wants money) has decided people would buy guns wherever they want... It's a no brainer. Be intelligent. I am truly saddened. My heart goes out to all the victims and the family of the victimes. But your government is responsible for this, he is to blame for all of this. America is protecting corporate interests over people lives. It's pathetic.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • Fig1024

      The guy was a psycho and there is clear evidence he was planning his attack for months.
      Do you think if there weren't any guns in America, people like him would go "oh I guess I won't be killing anyone"

      I mean – honestly? do you really believe that banning guns would somehow influence people like him?
      If you want to stop mass shooting, go for root of the problem – social outreach, mental health, counseling of people before they get to that stage of murderous intent.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andy

      So whats to stop someone from doing something like the Oklahoma bombing. Driving a a semitruck into a crowd at highspeed. Making a chemical bomb with household cleaners. They all do the same thing, Mass killings can not be stopped anymore then you can stop a suicide bomber. These people know they are going to prison or going to die for their crimes, if they dont care about dieing you arent going to stop them.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • Canadasucks

      "but why some people are aloud to purchase mass destruction guns, used in wars, automatic weapons you do not even need to reload, weapons that can carry 100 ammos and maybe more"

      Really, there were no automatic weapons at the shooting.... and never seen a gun that had unlimited bullets..... lol and wtf is 100 ammo, really, who is stupid.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sarah

      You are absolutely correct. I am an American that believes guns need to be made illegal period! The 2nd Amendment was passed in 1791 and back then guns had rudimentary rifling and were single-shot weapons. I don't think our founding fathers meant for it to mean a person has the right to keep a small arsenal capable of mass murder in their home. Mention gun control and you are automatically labeled un-American and a liberal. Funny thing is I live in NYC and I feel safer here than I would in middle America.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • HaddaKnuff

      Looking at your poor sentence structure and word usage (eg aloud instead of allowed) you don't have much room to call anybody stupid.

      July 21, 2012 at 9:07 pm | Report abuse |
  28. rixter

    I don't think we should be stopped at only carrying guns!!!! I suggest we also get to carry bombs, that way when one of these "Bad" gun carrying people step out of line and start shooting.... we can toss out bombs at them....

    we all would only get a few bombs each a year... you now because it should be our right.... The older you get the bigger your bombs can be... and seniors should get to carry nukes, because they are the wisest... the younger kids would have to start out with hand grenades then work their way up....

    July 21, 2012 at 7:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hiway

      No RIXTER – bombs are to unwieldy to carry and throw – especially for senior citizens. A simple handgun is sufficient to stop a maniac thank you. .

      July 21, 2012 at 7:28 pm | Report abuse |
  29. Smokey

    If a crazy person is intent on attacking a public gathering place such as a mall or theater or outside a nightclub, with concealed high-powered weapons, there is really nothing that can be done to prevent that. If someone is in the right place at the right time maybe they'll be lucky enough to stop that person before they can kill very many people. But to base any kind of policy or policy changes on these very rare events doesn't really make very much sense, they are rare and unless you want to live in a police state they are more or less unpreventable.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:14 pm | Report abuse |
  30. Jimmy

    Sooooooooo, Mr David Murray, let me understand you here. Your solution is to get rid of gun free zones, based on logic where no mass murderers or deranged people ever went to a shooting range to go on their killing sprees. Sooooo, in essence, you think the local bowling alley or Walmart should have a shooting range add-on because no psycho in his right mind would dare show up. Right????

    How looney tunes does that sound? Do you realize that most of these insane people chose to perform these terrible acts either in locations where they've experienced a negative situation or where a large vulnerable collection of people have gathered? But based on what you say, some nut will go "You know, I just got fired from my job, but instead of trying to mow down my ex-boss and 15 more people in the company parking lot, I'm going to go down to the nearest shooting range and show the people there just how mad as hell I am".

    But thanks for your suggestion, since some states are considering allowing students to carry guns on campus, then may as well build a shooting range next to the library.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:11 pm | Report abuse |
  31. Dennis

    Ignore that Australia has manage this.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:11 pm | Report abuse |
  32. Observer

    We can't stop the events from happening, but we can cut down on the carnage. This can happen if we can get laws passed to limit mass-killing guns in spite of the NRA's fights to ensure that people can collect an arsenal of mass-killing weapons. How many more mass-killings can we have to appease the NRA's desire for people to have the capability of mass killings?

    July 21, 2012 at 7:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dirk

      Nobody should be able to buy 6000 rounds of ammunition.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • Blossom

        Six thousand rounds of ammo is nothing to a dedicated target shooter. Many marksmen burn through 15 to 20 thousand rounds a year or more. I will usually fire off 3 to 4 hundred rounds per range session myself and I'm no where near the perfectionist that some are.

        July 21, 2012 at 8:11 pm | Report abuse |
  33. DYWLF

    For those of you willing to surrender your lives to a socialist goverment and support the confiscation of guns, you make a fundamental error in believing this will stop violence. It will lead to is civil war because the majority of free americans will not surrender to tyrants.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • Pitbull

      I agree with you. For this government to enforce through the United Nations the taking away of people who own guns is not going to stop nuts from obtaining weapons as is the case here. Stricter applications for purchase of guns needs to be enforced and no one should be able to purchase weapons via the internet. I don't own a gun and have no desire for you but I do believe people have a right to own a weapon but not these military type weapons. i can see a gun or a rifle but not these other weapons..

      July 21, 2012 at 7:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Joan

      The Socialist remark is rather a stupid one. I think that you should actually look up history my friend and find out what you are talking about. Having been born in a country where we had a Socialist and Conservative government I can assure you that the Democrat party is NOT a Socialist party. This being said I can also assure you that without the Socialist Government there would not have been health care and unemployment care given to people in the 40s and upwards. You have, I am afraid , been listening too much to FOX and the Republican party. Read more and you may learn.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:13 pm | Report abuse |
      • Pitbull

        You have the problem. Obama hates America. He is a liar and is turning this country into a socialistic country by putting more on welfare and food stamps, creating a healthcare system, if you read it, is not good at all. I cannot believe you lived in a socialistic country because if you had you would realize they are all going broke as well as the people having to pay high taxes for those who refuse to purchase insurance and there are many including Bob Beckel who refuse to own insurance. I don't make much money but excellent healthcare is important to me and I will give up toys in order to have insurance. That's more important to me than xboxx's, cell phones, 70 inch tvs, etc.

        July 21, 2012 at 7:20 pm | Report abuse |
        • Blossom

          Well you've got the GOP catch phrases down pat anyway. Your completely wrong about Obama being a socialist though.

          July 21, 2012 at 8:13 pm | Report abuse |
        • Frank

          People who keep saying that it's not the guns in our society, it's the people who shoot them that are to blame for all the violence. Well..duh...maybe if the guns weren't so easily available (assault weapons in particular) then maybe the people who shoot them would have to use something less destructive. Of course there are thousands of these weapons of mass destruction in our society because of the hairbrained idea that our forefathers wanted all of us to have the right to own them. I'm sure they would all roll over in their graves if they could see at what lengths people have taken the second amendment to. Of course, they would not want all of us to have military assault weapons in our homes and concealed handguns under our shirts as we drive our cars down the road and go into public places. Anyone who thinks they would must have a screw loose in their head. We may not be able to get rid of all the AK47s in our society, but by banning their manufacture, sale and possession, we could sure the hell make getting them more difficult. Next, we would need to pass extremely punitive laws for anyone caught with such a weapon in their possession...like a $10,000 fine. And, anyone convicted of using an assault weapon in the commission of a crime should be given mandatory 10 year prision sentences. Anyone using an assault weapon to kill another would be given a mandatory death sentence. This might make gun freaks think twice about keeping such destructive guns in their possession. Those who claim having so many guns in our society makes us safer, need only to watch or read the news about the ongoing carnage that, indeed, makes us one of the most dangerous societies on the planet. Where else do you need to worry about getting shot while shopping at the mall, attending school, or going to the movies.
          It's just a damn shame that our politicians are so interested in safe guarding their political careers that they haven't the moral courage to take on the NRA and all of the gun nuts in our society and do something to stop the maddness.

          July 21, 2012 at 8:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hiway

      I agree. The Second Amendment agrees. During the American Civil War large segments of the population were disarmed then robbed and slaughtered at will. Those who wanted guns got them and will do it now. What we need to know is why this happens and address that issue or issues to the best of our ability. I agree too this is not the first time nor will it be the last but an armed person in that theater could have ended it by killing or wounding and incapacitating Holmes. The only reason that slaughter went on so long was no one was armed, no one had a fighting chance.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • rixter

      lol what the hell are you talking about? of course it wont stop the violence but it sure as hell would slow things down a bit....

      (I do think it is our right to carry a gun) but I think you over dramatized your point.... you make all the gun lovers seem like red neck militia men....

      I always carry bacon when I go out, just in case I come in contact with a mass murdering gunmen, I would offer him some bacon, and he would probably accept it, because eveyone loves bacon....

      July 21, 2012 at 7:25 pm | Report abuse |
  34. bob the builder

    i love how every one on this sight is bitching about his " automatic" rifle haha or even semi automatic rifle u people are a bunch of dumm asses did any one even read the whole story? i dont here any one bitching about him using a shot gun.... in 1 round fired from a shot gun u can project from 6 projectiles or pellets or bb what ever u want to call them to over 60. the now make shot guns that hold 20 rounds and ill tell u what a shot gun in close corders is a lot more devistating and faitle than an ar15. sooo for those of u that want to be sheep and lead around your whole life u can follow the liberals right off the clif. as for me ill be pleased and happy to serve and protect my self. thanks and have a good day

    July 21, 2012 at 7:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • Joan

      I am surprised that you are able to sleep at night Bob. I think that you need to grow up – a lot !!!!

      July 21, 2012 at 7:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • 7950021

        Joan, your just in uninformed btch without a brain.

        July 21, 2012 at 7:13 pm | Report abuse |
  35. Joan

    The gun laws have to be discussed intelligently, For anyone to legally be able to purchase a AR-15 assult rife, Remington 870 shotgun and a 40 calibre Glock handgun is completely absurd , It is about time that the National Rifle Association was taken to task on the amount of money they pay to Political Parties so that they have the upper hand on the decisions made by the Parties when they have their gun law votes.

    The GOP should be the ones who hang their head in shame for voting against any gun law changes.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • Pitbull

      The GOP is not against that what they are against is your rights being taken away via the United Nations. The United Nations has no rights in America to confiscate peoples guns. That's what the GOP is fighting about.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:15 pm | Report abuse |
      • kamana

        The GOP are the Gangsters Of Politics and gangsters are always supportive of the right to bear arms.

        July 21, 2012 at 7:50 pm | Report abuse |
  36. DYWLF

    Hard to get past CNN's censors with any discussion of self protection but I will try again. I have heard of no armed citizendry in the theater, this is why the madman was not stopped.

    July 21, 2012 at 7:04 pm | Report abuse |
  37. Francis24

    There are 310 million Americans living in a vast country. I don;t think we can prevent individuals from acting upon their psychotic ideas and impulses. What we should be able to do is take away the guns–prevent the sales of assault weapons and the scale of ammunition which this lone gunman was able to purchase so easily at stores and over the internet. I do not think it is enough anymore to talk about better ways for states to regulate the sale of weapons. The second amendment itself needs to looked at again and repealed. Then law enforcement should try to confiscate all the guns. There is no reason for individual citizens to have weapons except to shoot other citizens.If it ever made sense for individuals to own weapons for protection against tyranny that era has long passed. People who want to go hunting could find a way to register with the police in the hunting area and rent the guns which they will bring back after the hunting trip ends. No one needs to own a small or large arsenal. Certainly society as a whole needs to protect itself against this floating arsenal of weaponry and explosives.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • 7950021

      This is the most moronic statement ever.And typical of small minded thinking. Its like people sniffing glue, paint, gasoline to get high. What are you going to do everytime theres a problem? Remove all glue, paint, or gasoline from the country!? How stupid to think that to entirely remove something from society will ever work. People will get what they want if they need it. Its the average law abiding citizen that will not benefit from any suggestion of that sort. All your doing is putting the good iperson n jepordy even more than before. Taking all guns away will never happen. Prohibition didn't work either when they took all the booze away. Look what happened. Idiot ideas like this is so far left I guess what would a person expect from idiots comments like this. Try thinking at a logical, practical level and you might accomplish something.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • kamana

        The only positives that ensued from this cowardly slaughter is that most of those killed were white.

        July 21, 2012 at 7:53 pm | Report abuse |
  38. Bilbo

    Hey, I'm a liberal, I don't own a gun, but if I decided I needed one to defend my life, I should be able to obtain one legally. We could outlaw assault rifles, but a lunatic can do just as much damage with a couple of handguns. If fame is what motivates these lunatics, then we should remove the enticement by eliminating their names and faces from history. Robert Heinlein wrote that an armed society would be a polite society (although I think it might take a while for all the lunatics to wipe each other out first), and I can understand the logic behind this and some of the other posters' comments here. It occurs to me, like it or not, and sad to say, that if just one armed citizen had been in that theater, whether a police officer or a Bernhard Goetz, then this particular lunatic might never have gotten off a second shot.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:56 pm | Report abuse |
  39. Hiway

    Anytime you disarm society or create gun free zones you've told predators where to hunt. What I don't get is Holmes hung around. He had to know cell phones were buring up the airwaves – the law would be there in no time – then surrendered without a struggle and told police his apartment was rigged with explosives and waiting for them. What is with that?

    July 21, 2012 at 6:55 pm | Report abuse |
  40. Bill

    The short answer is NO...as long as we can easily buy a Glock or other handgun with large-capacity magazines and we have no way of judging who is truly eligible and capable of the responsibility of gun ownership, this stuff will continue; our entertainment spoon-feeds us violence which desensitizes us as a culture to bloodshed, so there will be even more as time goes on.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hiway

      If not with guns fanatics use bombs, poison gases, poison foods, etc. Anyone who knows anything about how a ammo magazine works can make a large magazine. Holmes was certainly smart enough to do it. The question is not why do we have guns or gun parts, the question is why do people like Holmes do it. He is not talking about that, maybe because even his fevered mind knows any answer would be lame, making him lame?

      July 21, 2012 at 7:04 pm | Report abuse |
  41. cheetos

    My heart goes out to all the victims and there families its truly a sad turn of events. As for the debate on gun control ,everytime something like this happens we start with the comments of there should be stricter gun laws and so forth.Well i must say that i disagree with those people that all of a sudden want to be conservative when something like this occurs...let me remind you people that if that is the case we should also start banning alcohol and tobacco because that has killed more people yearly than guns

    July 21, 2012 at 6:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • moomoo

      And how about getting rid of all those highly dangerous cell phones that are causing so much carnage on the roads due to texting. How many innocent famalies need to be wiped out before the liberals start calling for the phone ban

      July 21, 2012 at 7:48 pm | Report abuse |
  42. GunnerGA

    And they are typically WHITE. It seems relevant to identify the perpetrators as Arab, Muslim, Black, Hispanic, etc... But most mass murderers tend to be white guys. There are some who aren't, but most are. Lets identify his as white since it is normal in reporting crime to note the race of the shooter.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:51 pm | Report abuse |
  43. DYWLF

    This action was carried out by a madman, I repeat a madman. The banning of guns is irrational and will not stop madmen but It will interfere with our right to protect ourselves. I just wish there had been a concealed carry person there, but these were young people and still believed in the goodness of people. My suggestion is that people accept that your protection is your responsibility and not goverments. Buy a weapon, train, train, and train. Get a concealed carry permit and when the madman comes send him to hell where he belongs.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • Neon Jeff

      To your point – I posted earlier . . .
      People still hold strong feelings about guns, because they were designed to kill efficiently and quickly. Mass killings will continue as long as the human race exists – as I told a friend of mine that is pro gun rights and is fearful of government taking his right to carry away – "You are not going to stop CRAZY with a gun, before CRAZY kills with a GUN!" He gasped. It did not occur to him that even people carrying weapons could end up getting killed.

      But my point wasn't to ban guns, although I wish they had never been invented – my point is that you can not change human nature. You may not believe me – but while most people are shocked by what happened – there is a small group of people that absolutely revel in the details of the carnage that is reported by the media – and wish they had the balls to exactly do what this nut-job did. Humans are predators, and the most destructive animal on the planet – if they feel cornered, trapped, or disinfranchised by society – they will lash out with violence toward others. Using guns is the easiest method currently available. If people in the theater had been carrying guns – I am sure that crazy fellow would not have left the theater standing.

      To sum up my point – Better to carry a gun, and not have to use it, than to not have a gun, when you really need one.

      And – guns can NOT be UN-INVENTED. The world will NEVER be safe from GUN VIOLENCE. Laws to ban guns will not be followed – at least by US citizens, who grew up with guns as a Constitutional Right.

      My advice – learn how to handle and use a weapon – get trained by experienced professionals like military, or police. When out and about MAINTAIN situational awareness – know what is going on around you. STORE OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • rixter

        Better to carry a gun and not use it? two things I see wrong with this.... my best guess is that you would have lot higher odds of killing you or your family accidently rather than ever come face to face with an armed gunman... I'm 45, I've never come close thank God... secondly and probably a lot more likely: person "A" who now gets to carry a gun and happens to get pissed at person "B", who now also gets to carry a gun.... boom boom boom pow, person "A' get's hurt, person "B" escapes injury while Person "C" and "D" are killed in the crossfire.... more gun carrying people will mean more gunfire deaths pretty simple math....

        July 21, 2012 at 7:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • angela

      I am so sorry for the loss of life and for those injured. For the law abiding citizen, who has the right to carry a concealed weapon, they would not have been allowed to bring it into the theater. In a public place, where people pay to enter, by law, you are not allowed to bring your weapon in. So other than off-duty law enforcement, no private person would have been allowed to have firearms on their person. That makes this whole situation scary because the crazy individuals and criminals win.

      July 21, 2012 at 7:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Frank

      I get so sick and tired of hearing gun nuts claim that we all need to be armed with some kind of gun to be safe from all the crazies, criminals and the government and that by have strict gun laws is somehow taking away our "rights".
      Our forefathers never intended for us to have assault weapons, whose only purpose is to kill other people and in large numbers to boot. Guns DO NOT MAKE US MORE SAFE!!! How many cases of self defense where someone used a concealed weapon,or especially an assault weapon, to protect themselves against a madman or criminal?? Now think about how many times we hear about people shooting people over rage, jealousy, or madness. It should be obvious to any thinking person that guns do not make us safer, they make our society more dangerous and the only way to treat the problem is by at the very least, banning the sale and possession of assault weapons and when others are caught with them there should $10,000 fines. When used in the commission of a crime...long mandatory prison sentences, and when used to kill others, a mandatory death sentence. Stop worrying about an individual's right to own a gun and start thinking about the more basic right of people to have life.

      July 21, 2012 at 8:43 pm | Report abuse |
  44. rurokn2

    OK, I didn't read every post but I read a lot ... am I the only one out here who's more upset about the body armor than the guns and ammo??? I've got no problem with the Glock but the AK is hard to justify for public sale and unless you think it's a good idea to store ammo for a long time buying that much at one time, especially for an AK type weapon, should have raised flags but .... how do you justify full head to toe body armor?? Seriously "Um, I just think the suit looks cool", "I'm just gonna wear it to a costume party", "My g/f thinks I look hot in a uniform". Is it even legal to buy body armor for personal use, and if so, why? Does the NRA support this?

    July 21, 2012 at 6:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Morgan Powys

      " Is it even legal to buy body armor for personal use, and if so, why"

      Yes, it is. Why? Um, for the same reason police and military wear them. You know, not to die and stuff. Der

      July 21, 2012 at 6:50 pm | Report abuse |
  45. David Murray

    The answer is so simple its ridiculous. Get rid of the gun-free-zones. I want everyone to stop and think of every mass shooting they can think of. Columbine, VA Tech, Norway shootings, and this most recent one in the movie theater. All of those took place in gun-free-zones. These shooters go there specifically because they know there will be no resistance and they can slaughter people easily. Gun-free-zones are basically an invitation to those looking to kill people.

    I have to ask why you've never seen a headline in the news that a man walks into a shooting range or a gun store and kills 50 people? Has anyone ever tried? If they did, they didn't get very far. I don't think most crazy people would even try. Even those who are suicidal and plan to kill themselves at the end of their rampage want to have the highest body count they can. So they know they wouldn't last 30 seconds trying to massacre a police station or a shooting range.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mux

      There is another simple solution; Extremely restrictive or No guns for normal public. That is all.
      Among all these different states where there are very little gun restrictions, can you tell me one place where a normal person is able to use his gun and save people from being murdered ? No not even one instance.
      Even if everyone has guns normal people will not be trained enough to use it during such moments.

      In the name of 2nd amendment, the likes of idiots like Charlton Heston & Ted Nugent purely take advantage of this situation for the sake of money. As Bloomberg said all of the leaders lack the courage to tackle it head on

      Times of 2nd amendment were different. There is no use for a weapon in a normal house hold

      July 21, 2012 at 7:00 pm | Report abuse |
  46. conoclast

    Remember back in '08 when you couldn't find a round of ammunition on any shelf? The "armagheddon armies" bought them all - to use as currency when the fit hit the shan. Where are they now, one wonders? An acquaintance of mine has 25,000 rounds stashed; that's quite an investment in negativity!!

    July 21, 2012 at 6:27 pm | Report abuse |
  47. SokrMom

    We don't need to "put an end to all senseless violence," which would be impossible. However, we could really put a crimp in these mass-murder rampages by banning ownership of automatic assault rifles.While there is a right to bear arms in the Constitution (until Americans get their act together and amend it to at least include a less-broad provision), Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes observed more than a century ago that "The law begins to draw distinctions, as soon as it is civilized." I like to believe our Country is a civilized place.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • David Murray

      Assault weapons are never used in these types of crimes. The problem is most people assume an assault weapon is an assault weapon because it "looks scary" and not for what it can actually do. There has never been a mass shooting anywhere of civilians that I'm aware of that used real assault weapons. The kids at columbine and even this guy at the movie theater were just using regular old semi-automatic rifles that are no different than your garden variety hunting rifle, other than cosmetic appearance.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:27 pm | Report abuse |
      • J gallo

        Yea, but semi-automatic assault rifles that can be fitted with a magazine clip of 100 rounds and from which 60 rounds can be fired in less than a minute ( according to Aurora police chief ) is not much better

        July 21, 2012 at 9:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • minerran

      "automatic assault rifles" are very difficult to get. They are usually in excess of $20,000 and require a very special permit from ATF. The shooter did not have automatic weapons. One weapons expert said that the ideal killing machine in that situation was not the AR-15 rifle he had, but the better choice was the 12 gauge shotgun loaded with buckshot. So are we banning the shotgun also? If you ban the "assault" rifle, he would have used a shotgun instead and killed perhaps 25 people instead of 12. It important to do your research before saying "ban this" or "ban that".

      July 21, 2012 at 6:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Morgan Powys

      Do you know the difference between automatic and semi-automatic? Until you do, stop posting.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:52 pm | Report abuse |
  48. jtsonberg

    Very easy to prevent mass shootings: Just require every adult to be trained in use of firearms and to carry one at all times. Of course, this might lead to a lot more non-mass (individual) shootings, but you only get to pick one type to prevent.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:16 pm | Report abuse |
  49. Cindy

    I have seen that rocket launchers are now available in the country. When someone takes down an airplane over a populated city maybe people will rethink these weapons. But the NRA will have a good excuse as to why someone needs one.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • minerran

      No Cindy, if you mean anti-aircraft rockets, they are not available. Maybe a rocket launcher that shoots a smoke rocket for july 4th perhaps? Are you confused?

      July 21, 2012 at 6:22 pm | Report abuse |
      • Cindy

        No, saw them on TV. They have them down in Texas. Bringing them across the border. They are against the law, but they are available.

        July 21, 2012 at 6:25 pm | Report abuse |
        • minerran

          ok Cindy, well if its against the law already then what do you want us to ban? I don't understand you.

          July 21, 2012 at 6:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • moomoo

      And cell phones kill how many family's? Ban everything and live in paradise

      July 21, 2012 at 7:58 pm | Report abuse |
  50. Sean

    Short answer to the title of this article...no.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:15 pm | Report abuse |
  51. lbpauline

    I'm from Italy. In my country everybody can legally buy a gun (registration, training period, etc.) Nobody can legally go around with a gun though, with the exception of some cases depending on the profession. I do not remember any massacre like the one in Colorado.
    I think that everywhere anyone can suddenly go crazy, but it is rare to see such a magnitude like in this case. Europe has a population of roughly 800 million people and the only country in which horrific massacres were perpetrated by a single attacker is Norway, where buying a weapon is strictly controlled. Then, in Europe, we have a history of terrorism (Ireland, UK, Spain, Germany, Italy) that made us suffer for years. Two of my parents' friends were killed by those b.....ds. I do not see any difference between a terrorist attack and the Colorado carnage.
    This guy is as mad as all the terrorists, no difference.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • minerran

      Every country is different and for those who say we should copy the European way of doing things, its important to remember that our culture, history, demographics, geographics, etc. are vastly different. Its just not a valid comparison. Should we look at what works in Europe and study the possibility of applying it here? Absolutely. But for those who say that we should do such and such because it works in country x, that is simplistic.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:25 pm | Report abuse |
  52. John

    The founding fathers did want the public to have arms to overthrow an out of control government, but in todays day and age, those days are over. With the weapons that the government has a rag tag group of malcontents wouldn't have a chance to overthrow the government. At this point the selfish NRA types just want their toys and don't care who gets hurt or killed. This is a sick society and we are getting what we deserve. And it will continue to happen, maybe your town is next!

    July 21, 2012 at 6:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • minerran

      Are you a military expert to conclude that?

      July 21, 2012 at 6:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • John

        If your so sure of yourself why don't you try to overthrow the government and see if you are successful! I don't have to be a military expert to know you are kidding yourself.

        July 21, 2012 at 6:58 pm | Report abuse |
  53. Robert

    Look STOP sending me messages about this gun crap, because so far everyone of you are taking my words and building a complete dumb ass translation of it. (Not talking about you Skip or Brandy) LISTEN I'm about to say it as simple as I can for you butt holes.
    MY VIEW:
    If you want to own 20,000 rounds of ammo I believe you should own 20,000. If you want to own 50 guns, then buddy you should have the right to own 50. But why in the hell would you want to get that in one week? Easy answer, you want to either raid another country or go to a shopping center and kill innocent people. Because a hunter a collector, and someone who wants to stock pile for Armageddon will not be in a hurry to get that in one damn week. They have mouths to feed, they have a car note to pay. A killer don't care about blowing his savings and everything he has because he want be coming back to anything. So the argument I hear is, well I know I want do that, but my rights should not be violated to where it says I have to have a grace period each month to buy only so much ammo. How is that violating your rights when you can't even pay for that damn much anyway. That stupid little grace period could make a killer calm down and rethink about what he is doing, or someone suddenly steps up and reaches out to him and gets the help he needs to not do the ugly deed. Fight for something that is there people not something that you are not going to even use anyway. DO YOU NOT SEE THAT'S HOW ARE DAMN GOVERNMENT THINKS. Use your damn common sense BECAUSE by GOD our so called leaders DON"T. Sorry but I'm sick of seeing children dying at the hands of stupidity. And I'm tired of people saying the man did the shooting not the gun. That's true, but if the man only had 2 rounds of ammo, 50 or more people would not have been shot. END OF STORY DON"T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT NO MORE.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • minerran

      the only "butt" "hole" is you.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:36 pm | Report abuse |
  54. Taluka

    We can't be 100% safe, anywhere, ever. It's sad, but it's a fact. If someone has it in their mind to kill, they will kill, regardless of gun laws or any other laws or location. I'm very sorry for the victims and families involved in this, I can't imagine what they are going through, even the Holmes family. Hopefully, since he is still alive, he will provide answers.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:09 pm | Report abuse |
  55. rodelandrada

    I don't think our Founding Fathers had Columbine, VA Tech, and the Batman massacres in mind when they drafted the Right to Bear Arms in the Constitution. Sure, I love owning my gun....but they shouldn't be in the hands of some people. And some types of guns shouldn't even be made available to the public.

    July 21, 2012 at 6:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cindy

      They certainly did not intend for people to buy 6000 rounds of ammo. Maybe we should make it a law that you cannot buy ammo. Everyone will have to make his own.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:11 pm | Report abuse |
      • minerran

        Cindy. Be informed before saying we should not be allowed to buy a certain quantity of ammo. I am a gun owner and I buy 1000 rounds at a time. Why? Because its cheaper. Ammo is expensive and like everything else, buying in bulk saved money. Why do you have to conclude its to go kill hundreds of people. Shooting at paper targets is a sport and its fun. I use typically 500 rounds per session. Do your research.

        July 21, 2012 at 6:38 pm | Report abuse |
  56. wezeeg

    This country tracks every Sudafed capsule purchased here and prohibits multiple purchases of that decongestant within a given period of time. It seems really stupid to waste money on monitoring a nasal decongestant and not keep track of how many weapons and how much ammunition a person with the notion to kill people can buy in six weeks.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • D. Lefevre

      My sentiments exactly.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • minerran

      They already can and do track it. To purchase the gun, you need to get the background check from the government so they know every gun I've purchased. Second, most people purchase online with a credit card because its cheaper. With a court order the government can see what i purchased. What else do you want?

      July 21, 2012 at 6:41 pm | Report abuse |
      • Minerrranfan

        Also, in the states that border Mexico, gun dealers are reporting sales of more than one assault rifle at a time. Eric Holder and Obama are diluting the 2nd Amendment through executive fiat.

        July 21, 2012 at 7:38 pm | Report abuse |
  57. Dynamic

    Nobody needs an assault weapon, but since they are legal somehow, why not arm everyone with grenades, rocket launchers anti-tank missiles, etc.? If there ever is a need for the people to arm themselves in order to overthrow the government (the way our current government got its start) then the people should be realistically armed to face modern weapons of war. Everyone needs to own and carry an assault weapon if anyone can own and carry an assault weapon.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • minerran

      "nobody needs..."

      Since when in our republic does the majority decide what freedoms or items are to be granted based on "need"?

      July 21, 2012 at 6:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • HaddaKnuff

      As long as we're make stupid suggestions, let's everyone get a FA-18 Hornet so we can reall give the government a run for it's money.

      July 21, 2012 at 9:48 pm | Report abuse |
  58. HuPhartNgau

    No matter what we do, there will still be nut cases who snap. But, we can make such occurrences less apt to happen, but halting the sale of weapons designed to kill people in rapid succession. There is NO justification to sell non-sportsman / hunting weapons in this country.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • Linda

      You are so right, it is insanity for these guns to be sold to anyone in this country.

      Also, why would parents take a 6 year old girl and a 4 year old girl to see this horribly violent movies?

      July 21, 2012 at 6:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rw

      Remember fertilizer is a weapon too....McVay

      July 21, 2012 at 6:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • minerran

      The justification is that if I want it, i should be free to get it. Nobody is telling you what clothes to wear or car to drive. Shooting is a sport and just because you are afraid of my gun, that's not justification for taking it away from me if I've not broken any law.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:44 pm | Report abuse |
  59. Cindy

    As long as the NRA owns the Republican party, this will be your way of life. Their goal is to sell a gun to everyone over the age of 12. The NRA is behind laying off police officers. The fewer police officers, the fewer crimes are reported. They then convince the gun nuts that crime is down because of people own guns. The NRA owns you and controls you.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • bob the builder

      there is a way to stop this if there was just one person in that theater that was caring a concealed weppon chances are there would have bin far less tragity once the playing field is leveled courads like this dum as$ would run and hide i encourage every one to buy a gun and learn to shoot it than u dont have to relie on other to protect your self. taking the guns away from law abiding citizens will not fix the problem not at all. the people that go out and kill othere just for spite could give a dam if they catch another charge for having an ileagle gun or stolen gun if u are going to kill some one and face life in prison thats life plus another 10 years for having an ileagle gun ?

      July 21, 2012 at 6:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Adam G.

      Now this is just an irresponsible post. You make baseless claims as if they are fact and naive people will read this and without doing any research will believe this nonsense. Now I do not own one gun and am not a member of the NRA but I'm not going around making ridiculous claims about the organization either. Look, if someone wants a gun, any type of gun, they will get it. They don't care how they get it, they will get it. If they don't care about the law against murder they sure won't care about the law against certain types of guns.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • minerran

      Oh do come on Cindy. Now you rant about the NRA.

      Yes, the gun industry is big business and there are those who want to protect it. But also its my right as a sportsman to have my guns and to be able to defend myself. I think if some guy came to rape you, you'd feel differently after.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:46 pm | Report abuse |
  60. Thomas Murray

    It is crucial that Media outlets like CNN.com and CNN Television heed the advice of their own experts and stop encouraging these massacres with 24-hour blanket coverage. These killers thrive on the glorification they expect the media will supply. CNN, as the premier news outlet, can't afford to be behind the curve on the matter of curbing the glorification of violence.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:57 pm | Report abuse |
  61. Layla

    Robert F Kennedy's Speech Mindless Menace Of Violence
    describes how saddened I feel and how much my heart breaks
    for those who lost their lives at the hands of a madman

    Below is the link:


    July 21, 2012 at 5:56 pm | Report abuse |
  62. ted

    Three Ways to reduce such crimes:
    1. Ban all semi-auto weapons and allow only one home gun per family.
    2. Print a photo of the joker poster-size and have people walk on it, and show that instead of his face on front pages.
    3. Sentence him to life in solitary without any access to anything but bear walls and 30 min walk under wired roof.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • jim in idaho

      That would be a darned good way to start a Civil War.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:54 pm | Report abuse |
  63. Layla

    First, let me say my heart breaks for those injured and killed at the hands of a madman
    I pray for their family and friends as I am sure this is devastating to all of them as I know
    it is or me

    Could this have been prevented, quite possibly if there was stricter gun control laws in every
    state and stricter laws on ammunition purchases. Also security needs to be stepped up in open
    places where people congregate

    Certainly one gun with a sufficient amount of ammunition is more than enough to defend yourself
    You don't need 4 or 5 guns and 600 rounds of ammunition. If the laws were stricter this massacre
    may have been prevented because officials would have been warned of this lunatic's
    purchases and been able to monitor him more closely

    I also think it's important because a 6 yr old has died in this massacre that parents with infants
    and young children need to be more responsible as well as the theaters owners

    Children should be sleeping at midnight not at a violent movie at midnight just because the parent
    feels they need to see the movie

    If you can't afford a sitter, stay home and become a responsible parent your children's
    welfare needs to come before your own selfish wishes

    Through this tragedy I keep hearing Robert F Kennedy's speech about the mindless menace
    of violence in America. If you are not familiar, I am sure you can find it on u-tube

    God help us all

    July 21, 2012 at 5:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Adam G.


      I keep hearing people say stricter gun laws but if guns were banned outright criminals would still get guns. Guns will always be available whether it's lawful or not. The answer isn't guns or no guns, it's the moral decay in society. The devaluation of human life has seeped into our culture. Fix this and you fix the problem.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:13 pm | Report abuse |
  64. scott

    Change the headline to "Can these mass killings be stopped"
    By blaming it all on guns, your simply showing a personal biase. If you want to get to the root of the matter, start discussing the actual issues, rather than a symptom of a broken society...

    July 21, 2012 at 5:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • lab

      well he could not have killed that many people with a knife...maybe explosives BUT we have the good sense to regulate them

      July 21, 2012 at 5:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • Morgan Powys

        Yeah, ask the people In oklahoma how well explosives regulations work. You can make explosives at home.

        July 21, 2012 at 6:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • minerran

      thank you Scott. finally some sense.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:47 pm | Report abuse |
  65. juan

    there is not reason for a doctor,student,bus driver or no military person to have an assault rifle...

    July 21, 2012 at 5:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • Morgan Powys

      ...except for that pesky constitution. We really need to repeal that whole thing, huh?

      July 21, 2012 at 7:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • maraschino

      just as there is no reason for you to be in our country, sir.

      July 22, 2012 at 9:10 am | Report abuse |
  66. Rw

    Anders Breivik, charged with the murder of 77 people, including dozens of young activists attending a political camp in Norway last year, is convinced the court trying him will find him sane and culpable.

    Norway has strict gun control laws

    July 21, 2012 at 5:42 pm | Report abuse |
  67. SarahTonin

    It would be interesting to try to stop this stuff! My suggestion is that since there is no dispute that they have the guy that did it, take him out to the front of the theater where the crime was committed, and shoot him IMMEDIATELY, all TV cameras running! He obviously didn't want to die, so give him what he didn't want the most! Let it be a visual lesson for anyone else who might like to try this. Even a deranged animal like this deserves true justice!

    July 21, 2012 at 5:39 pm | Report abuse |
  68. Jimmy

    Since it's clear that ammunition and weapons design has (and will continue) to advance to the point where potentially 30 people a clip could be slaughtered, then why not the clothing and apparel industry develop bullet-resistance garments and head wear? This may help deter psychos from buying these high powered guns – they would realize these guns would then be nearly useless. Oh that's right, the NRA would have a seizure, the gun manufacturers would only develop even more powerful weapons, and we probably would end up dressed in clothes making us look like the Teenaged Mutant Ninja Turtles.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:37 pm | Report abuse |
  69. 0rangeW3dge

    Buying a gun to "protect" your house is kind of like buying a dog to protect you againt mice.
    If you a responsible gun owner, you will keep your gun in a secured container un-loaded, and store your ammunition in an eaqually safe, but separate location. And by the time that you "need" it, it will be too late.
    Anyway, exactly how often are we called to arms for an armed invasion?
    You would do much better to train yourself with a Samurai sword (or a cast iron frypan).

    July 21, 2012 at 5:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • jaketinback

      Not sure where you got your information about a responsible gun owner but I will humbly submit you are way off. My wife and I both have loaded handguns in our nightstands and I have a tactical shotgun within easy reach. You are correct in one respect in that if you have your firearm stashed away in a safe and ammo in another place, when you need it you will never have time to get at it so you might as well have your butt in you hands because it will do you about as much good.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:46 pm | Report abuse |
    • scott

      Never heard of a small gun safe? attachs to the back of a piece of furniture, takes 2 secs to open, but is impossible to get into unless you know the combination....

      July 21, 2012 at 5:49 pm | Report abuse |
  70. Shawn

    Drunks kill people with their cars... Let's ban cars that way no drunk drivers could ever kill anybody.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • damo12345

      The intended purpose of a car is to move someone from place to place. Tragic accidents can happen, but it has a clear and peaceful primary purpose.

      A semi-automatic assault rifle capable of shooting over 100 bullets before you need to reload has a very clear purpose: killing a large number of people, quickly.

      Cut the crap.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • NRA

        It is my right

        July 21, 2012 at 5:35 pm | Report abuse |
        • lab

          your right to be stupid

          July 21, 2012 at 5:58 pm | Report abuse |
      • meg

        Yeah that is the purpose of the gun..... I wish i had one. Then when it comes time to stand up to our increasingly communist government we will have a slight chance. You think our founding fathers were so pro gun for no reason? Don't worry though when they put you in a FEMA camp you will feel really safe. No one will have a gun but the guards.

        July 21, 2012 at 5:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • alex

        assault rifles have select-fire capability the rifle he used most likely did not. don't be an ignorant fucking liberal

        July 21, 2012 at 5:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • Goet

        So, cars which kill tens of thousands are designed to be safe and yet still fail to keep people safe are somehow preferable to firearms which are designed to fire bullets which can maim/kill? Hmmm...

        Sounds to me like firearms do exactly what they are designed for and that CARS are defective products.

        July 21, 2012 at 5:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • Morgan Powys

        Yep, guns ARE for killing people Always have been. Until my gun jumps up one night, sneaks out to the liquor store, kills the clerk and brings me home the money it is no more evil than your car.

        July 21, 2012 at 7:03 pm | Report abuse |
      • moomoo

        And texting while driving? Killed more people yesterday than this worm

        July 21, 2012 at 8:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sarc

      Sure, if we banned cars.. it absolutely would stop a lot of killing, deaths from car accidents.

      But at least automobiles have some legitimate use. Transportation is good for society... so we take the good over the bad. What do guns do for us? Give us some entertainment to hunt? I'd sacrifice that entertainment value, if it means that my chances are reduced from getting shot at a local movie theater...

      To be clear.. safety in a large society requires some sacrifice to personal freedoms. Let's just all internalize that ..

      July 21, 2012 at 5:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • jaketinback

        Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

        Ben Franklin

        July 21, 2012 at 5:49 pm | Report abuse |
      • Morgan Powys

        I dont own guns for entertainment. I own them to kill those who wish to harm me and mine, provide food if the day ever comes I need to do that instead of go to Walmart, and to piss people like you off. When I go to the range, sure I have a good time but it is for the purpose of staying proficient.

        July 21, 2012 at 7:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • Phattee

      Specious logic. A car's purpose is transportation; a gun's sole purpose is to kill.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • 0rangeW3dge

      Well that is the point,,,,the car/gun is not so much an issue as the drunk. But imagine a drunk with a firearm...
      (not just "drunks", but how do you round up the loonies before they hurt someone, or themselves?)

      July 21, 2012 at 5:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Root Cause

      At some point the gun will not be the focus. At some point the light will turn on and we'll have to accept that more kids are killed in backyard pools every year than gun shots. "From 2005-2009, there were an average of 3,533 fatal unintentional drownings (non-boating related) annually in the United States — about ten deaths per day." (CDC) Of those, 2 per day were kids under 14. When is Wolf going to spend 24hrs on these senseless deaths?

      July 21, 2012 at 6:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • Neon Jeff

      People still hold strong feelings about guns, because they were designed to kill efficiently and quickly. Mass killings will continue as long as the human race exists - as I told a friend of mine that is pro gun rights and is fearful of government taking his right to carry away - "You are not going to stop CRAZY with a gun, before CRAZY kills with a GUN!" He gasped. It did not occur to him that even people carrying weapons could end up getting killed.

      But my point wasn't to ban guns, although I wish they had never been invented - my point is that you can not change human nature. You may not believe me – but while most people are shocked by what happened – there is a small group of people that absolutely revel in the details of the carnage that is reported by the media – and wish they had the balls to exactly do what this nut-job did. Humans are predators, and the most destructive animal on the planet - if they feel cornered, trapped, or disinfranchised by society - they will lash out with violence toward others. Using guns is the easiest method currently available. If people in the theater had been carrying guns - I am sure that crazy fellow would not have left the theater standing.

      To sum up my point - Better to carry a gun, and not have to use it, than to not have a gun, when you really need one.

      And – guns can NOT be UN-INVENTED. The world will NEVER be safe from GUN VIOLENCE. Laws to ban guns will not be followed – at least by US citizens, who grew up with guns as a Constitutional Right.

      My advice - learn how to handle and use a weapon - get trained by experienced professionals like military, or police. When out and about MAINTAIN situational awareness - know what is going on around you. STORE OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN.

      July 21, 2012 at 6:47 pm | Report abuse |
  71. Robert O. Kan, MD

    Major factors leading to these events are
    1. The second amendment, being twisted and applied to anyone wanting a weapon. (the founding fathers undoubtedly meant this amendment for hunting, law and order, and defense purposes)
    2. NRA, justifying any weapons use and promoting this type of violence, corrupting our government with campaign contributions which are nothing more than bribes.
    3. Our government officials, too scared to take a firm stand, fearing the loss of their job.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • jaketinback

      Im impressed that you know beyond a shadow of a doubt what our forefathers intended. Try and think for yourself sometime. Its enlightening.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:52 pm | Report abuse |
  72. Rw

    Someone like this could do alot more harm without a bullet. Just fertilizer....McVay

    July 21, 2012 at 5:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sarc

      Even though someone could do the same type of damage with fertilizer, they are less likely. It's like saying someone *could* theoretically steal plutonium and build a nuclear bomb. But what's the chance of that? It is much easier acquiring small arms to do this type of damage, then even building bombs. Thus, it's absolutely logical that making it hard to get guns/ammunition will decrease the mortality and chance of these mass killings. Our leaders just have to be brave enough to take action.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • Morgan Powys

        Wrong, I can construct pipe bombs far easier, cheaper and faster then you can go buy a gun. All using household chemicals and hardware store items. I could have killed FAR more people in that theater with them. I dont do it because I am not crazy, not because its too hard.

        July 21, 2012 at 7:09 pm | Report abuse |
  73. crimez

    Here's the solution:

    Before buying anything that shoots more than 4-5 rounds at a time you have to go for extensive mental and behaviour analysis to make sure you aren't totally crazy. This includes interviews with families. When people apply to be cops, they go through all this should be the same for trying to buy an assault weapon or body armor.

    You can still defend your home with a 5 shot deer rifle, or conceal carry handgun. You aren't going to be going up against the T3 terminator those 5 shots will be enough for you to reload. They won't be enough if you plan on murdering a McDonalds or theatre full of people.

    Yeah you can always buy weapons on the black market and make any sized mags you want but none of the spree shooters did or tried this (except Breivik, who was a determined terrorist and not a schizo spree shooter). It takes balls to go into the black market and get a weapon something none of these guy's have which is why they target children and unarmed civillians in restaurants, schools and theatres. You never hear about these guy's shooting up a police station for a good reason: they are cowards

    July 21, 2012 at 5:21 pm | Report abuse |
  74. Bob

    And for those of you with children who think you need a gun for home protection, look at the FBI's statistics. If you have a gun for home protection, it is 20 times, not 20 percent, TWENTY TIMES more likely to be used against a member of the household than an intruder. So for every headline "Granny fights off robber with gun" there are TWENTY "Child kills playmate after finding parent's gun" or "Wife accidentally shoots husband coming into house late" or "Brother shoots younger brother over PS3". Sure you can think that those statistics don't apply to you, but Las Vegas stays in business because of idiots like yourself who think they have a "system" or understand how that roulette wheel works.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Frank Brady

      Your claim is simply, utterly, and totally false. Take the RED pill. Here is reality.

      Until 1968, any one of any age could buy a rifle, shotgun, or pistol from any location by catalogue.The weapons would be delivered by the U.S. Post Office. In the wake of political assassinations, major national Gun Control was introduced in 1968 and the murder rate skyrocketed. Assuming you are really interested in facts–not propaganda–check out the pre and post murder rates in the U.S., before and after 1968. Facts are stubborn things.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jim DeMint

      Absolutely well said. I wish I could give you Internet points! Too bad it goes right over the suckers' heads.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:32 pm | Report abuse |
  75. Bob

    If we have reasonable gun laws, we can stop a lot these. The NRA objects to ANY gun laws no matter how reasonable. They wanted to add tagging to bullets so bullets could be traced and the NRA said no. I guess they want to shoot people anonymously like a good law-abiding citizen. Their lame argument "Well people will just steal guns and ammo and harass innocent victims of theft." Good. If someone steals ammo, they will report it and maybe catch a killer before he can commit the crime. If they don't report it, at least the police have a lead on the killer- he's the guy that stole the ammo from the "innocent citizen". And tell me that a "law-abiding citizen" needs to be able to fire 6,000 rounds of ammo a minute. What are they protecting their home from, a zombie apocalypse? I don't think anybody should be able to buy a weapon that can turn a pudgy, World of Warcraft-playing social outcast into a weapon of mass destruction. If that bozo in the theater or on the UofVA campus didn't have automatic weapons, people could have tackled him with no problem. "But people could make a bomb or hijack a plane!" BS. You how many bombs were used at Columbine? Over a dozen. You how many went off? Zero. Not a one. Because bombs take a bit of intelligence and skill to make. Lots of people try to make homemade bombs and 50% never go off. The other 50% go off in the home of the person trying to make them and solve the problem before it starts. Evolution in action. And do you think somebody with a box cutter and playdough is ever going to be able to get into the cockpit of a plane ever again? No way. That's something that wouldn't work two hours after 9/11. No one will ever fall for that again- it didn't even work effectively that day on United 92. Once the word was out, people knew what the game plan was and acted. So NRA, stop courting the militia and GOP stop listening to some very loud but very disturbed (or very ignorant) constituents and pass some reasonable gun laws. Every state that has enacted tougher gun registration laws has seen large increases in arrests of people who did use a registered gun or tried to register a gun they shouldn't. Those are crimes that are being stopped so the "Outlaws will always find guns" is BS to the people who every day are killed with a legally obtained assault rifle.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • Truthfultalk

      Canada has very strict gun laws. Did that stop the shooting in Toronto?? Did it stop any of their gun crimes? The criminals will always get black market guns whether guns are legal or not. Then where does that leave you? Maybe you like being caught with your pants down but I sir do not. If I can have an option of either sitting there waiting to getting shot or fire back and hopefully save people I choose the latter.
      More sane people should own personal weapons!! More people should allow themselves the option of fighting or dying.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:45 pm | Report abuse |
      • Adam

        Umm yea, I'm from Toronto, and sure we still have a few shootings a year, but its mainly black on black gang violence. Our laws are extremely strict and that is why most of Canada lives quite safely. I feel much safer knowing that people here can't walk around armed. But Americans will never understand... far too many rednecks that have been brainwashed by the NRA/Republitards.

        July 21, 2012 at 6:37 pm | Report abuse |
      • Canadian

        As someone from Canada, yes, gun crimes do happen here. however it is at a much lower rate than in the US. I am 28 years old and have seen only one handgun in my life– belonging to someone who teaches gun safety. The mentality towards guns is so different here. They are not looked at as something to protect you from other people. they are used for hunting or sport. I am all for our more strict gun laws. I know lots of people who hunt and care for their guns properly. but they went through the right channels to obtain them. I guess my stance is because of where i grew up though. Guns are just not a big issue here. they are generally not treated as toys, or a "right", so they seem to be respected alot more.

        July 21, 2012 at 8:32 pm | Report abuse |
  76. Karen

    I think stricter gun control measures are needed. But to ban guns would not take them out of the hands of someone who wanted to do something like this. They would get them no matter what. And as we can see, this is not a race, educated verses not educated, or someone raised in a good neighborhood verses being raised poor. I'm not saying that these factors don't matter, I'm just saying when the mind goes it goes. Tragic.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • crimez

      This is true. Breivik imported explosive fertilizer using phony farm importation documents. A terrorist in Canada got a job as an armed guard so he could get access to weapons and somehow passed all the tests. You can also mail order weapons now, google 'The Armory' a hidden site that sells no questions asked weapons by mail order.

      You can also anonymously buy weapons in Arizona by just looking on craigslist or the newspaper classifieds. These guy's will meet you in a parking lot and sell you a weapon no ID needed. Criminals don't need to smuggle weapons because they can already just buy them legally and anonymously.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Truthfultalk

      The gun laws now in place are a blatant violation of the Second Amendment "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" To own a gun legally you must pay to have a background check done and must wait anywhere from 3-8wks for your license. Sounds like infringement to me. I understnad this is required because of people like this buying a gun the same day they get fired and going back to work to settle a score. Stricter gun laws are not the answer. More sane people carrying personal weapons is the answer. People like this are bullies!!! Bullies are cowards and if they know that if they try something, several sane gun owners will be firing back at them they may just think twice. I carry a weapon to protect my children, family and you if need be. More responsible, sane, rational people need to carry a personal weapon. Stop the crazy bullies with a taste of their own medicine!!

      July 21, 2012 at 5:32 pm | Report abuse |
  77. andrew

    This is ALL on the heads of the NRA! A gun safety organization in the beginning, they've now morphed into a GUN SUPPLY organization for MASS KILLERS! It's not guns that kill people, it's NRA automatic weapon suppliers who KILL MASSES of people!!! The NRA should be sued, jailed, executed, shamed, tar-and feathered, tortured, and forever banned, because they've turned into a public threat! It's all about NRA blood money! Neither the government NOR the NRA will get my gun, but if the NRA members all DIED TONIGHT, we'd be better off! The NRA is NOT keeping the government from getting my gun! The NRA is SELLING AUTOMATIC WEAPONS! The NRA SUCKS!

    July 21, 2012 at 5:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Frank Brady

      Your rant is irrational and utterly false. Firearms are machines, tools, implements. They have no volition. They have no power to lure people to commit violence. Firearms, like any other implement, can be put to good or bad uses. Some people are evil. Some people are insane. We (you and I) are primarily responsible for our own safety and for our ability to defend ourselves and others. No one else can do this for us. No one.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:23 pm | Report abuse |
      • damo12345

        Nuclear weapons are just a tool. We should make them available to anyone that wants to own them, right?

        It's not that the weapon good only for killing large numbers of people is evil, the mind using it is.

        So make nuclear weapons legal, just like semi-automatic assault rifles.

        July 21, 2012 at 5:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • gundoods

      It'd be better if this guy used automatic weapons as it takes significant training in fire control not to blow out your clip of ammo in under a few seconds. Sadly his weapons were semi auto and he could pop off as many rounds as he wanted without having to know anything.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:30 pm | Report abuse |
  78. damo12345

    "Can they be stopped?"

    Well... yeah?

    Make it illegal to own a semi-automatic assault rifle (complete with over 100 rounds of ammo).

    I'm sure a few really determined psychotics might still find ways to hurt people, but it would be a lot harder and we'll have a greater chance of finding out in time to put a stop to it.

    If you absolutely want to argue for your right to have a handgun for self defense, I can understand that.

    But a semi-automatic assault rifle capable of firing over a hundred bullets before you need to reload?

    What on Earth do you think you'll be defending yourself from that you think THAT abomination needs to be legal? Are you worried about a Zombie Apocalypse? Do you think China will be invading any time soon?

    Cut the crap, there's NO good reason for such a horrible weapon to be something you can buy with ease.

    July 21, 2012 at 5:09 pm | Report abuse |
  79. Bob

    Of course they can be stopped. Get rid of the guns and weaponry that any kook can walk into Walmart and buy. And don't say it isn't possible. Other countries have. Saying that the Untied States can't is simply saying that we are not a civilized country and don't want to be. However, the majority of American don't own guns and don't want them in their homes, just as the majority of Americans would prefer to have a national health plan like civilized countries do. We have wealthy, powerful minorities that place corporate profits above human life and the well being of our county running things right now, and their paid propagandists telling us that we are better off with people dying in the streets from gunshot wounds and lack of health care than we would be with national health care strict gun control laws. We could vote their minions out of elected office and turn things around. All we need is the intelligence to recognize that things do not have to be the way they are and the political will to change them. Think about it.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • Adventure49

      While I might agree that reducing the availability of guns might reduce crimes of passion, this crime is premeditated. What's more, the person commiting this crime has sufficient techinical knowledge to find alternatives that are just as effective as firearms.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • mike

      If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Sorry. I'm a gun owner with a conceal carry permit, I'll keep my gun by my side, thank you.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • damo12345

        Is your gun a semi-automatic assault rifle capable of firing over 100 rounds before you need to reload?

        Even if you want to sit there and insist that if guns in general were banned gun violence would go up (despite what's been shown to happen in other countries), then at LEAST consider the absurdity of making a weapon like THAT legal.

        That is not a weapon of self-defense.

        That is a weapon for massacring human beings.

        July 21, 2012 at 5:12 pm | Report abuse |
        • ermahgerd

          Most any semi-auto rifle can hold a 100-round drum magazine; it doesn't have anything to do with the gun itself. And there's a reason police and military don't use 100-round magazines: they're impractical, heavy, and unreliable, and with even minimal training, it takes very little time to reload standard-size magazines anyway. 100-round drum magazines are what douchebags bring to the gun range because they're lazy and want to show off, so by all means, go ahead and ban them. Since only a very small percentage of gun crimes involve an "assault rifle", it's pretty much irrelevant to public safety in any case.

          July 21, 2012 at 5:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • ljcjec

      Getting rid of guns doesn't address the underlying problem, which is actually mental illness. With the intelligence and skills possessed by this man, he could have killed those people in any number of other ways, whether he had access to guns or not. 0.7% of the population has schizophrenia. Many others have many other mental disorders for which there is no identified physical cause, but for which environmental causes obviously exist (identical twins have only a 50% chance of developing schizophrenia if their twin has it). Mental illnesses and neurological disorders of all kinds are increasing at alarming rates in our country, and if we don't start viewing that problem as a shared societal problem, it will make itself one, as it clearly already has. No mentally stable person kills people, whether they have access to a gun or not. Mentally ill people can be capable of killing people whether they have access to a gun or not.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • imeubu

      Like you need a gun to kill 50 people. Anyone with an average IQ could put together a scheme. This is not an example of "impulse control"... this was planned and choreographed. I won't bother giving examples of how such a tragedy could be accomplished without guns... in fact preferrable to guns. As much as we don't like to admit it... we cannot stop crazy in a free society... no matter how many we prevent... many will succeed.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:11 pm | Report abuse |
  80. JPf47

    In my humble opinion, YES this can be stopped if justice returns to modern form of public lynching. In cases like this where the person is caught ie James Holmes, EXECUTE HIM IN PUBLIC FOR ALL TO WITNESS have firing squad each with live ammunition in clips and empty them all into him, If the phd shrinks who want to keep him alive to study his brain, they can have his brain after he is dead.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • Adventure49

      How will that stop a nihilist? Once you have decided to destroy yourself, what threat can the justice system produce to stop you?

      July 21, 2012 at 4:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • damo12345

      The rate of violent crime has gone down after we got rid of "lynching" vigilante justice. It was never a good deterrent.

      I suspect this tragedy would have happened the exact same way, only with more loss of life as the animal tried to get away and escape capture.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:19 pm | Report abuse |
  81. Joe

    Derp you are getting close. People who do these acts have a disease. We spend billions studying AIDS but none determining why these extreme violent acts occur. The Colorado acts, Virginia Tech, etc are at the extreme. There are many more violent acts that are not published that are caused by this same disease.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • ljcjec

      I completely agree. If a disease impacts the heart, lungs, kidneys, etc. everyone is all over trying to help someone with that illness.....once the brain is impacted, people automatically assume that the symptoms, which logically involve behavior, are completely intentional.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:11 pm | Report abuse |
  82. helensadornmentsblog

    So we do nothing? We don't even try to get a handle on this? This article has absolutely nothing to offer.

    I think there are many proactive steps that can be taken.
    Maybe look at other countries that have had similar problems and have found solutions. Australia is a country that enacted gun control laws that worked and helped eliminate mass killings.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • lolwut

      Uhm, Norway has very strict gun control laws yet Breivik was able to murder more people than anybody

      July 21, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • glenview0818

      Not necessarily true about Austrailia, they have had mass killings, but not with guns, and New Zieland does not have restrictive gun laws and they have not had any mass likkings with guns. I don't think it is reasonable not to counts 15 people killed with a fire bomb in 2000. There is always the possibility that a person with a gun may not have killed as many?

      July 21, 2012 at 4:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • ermahgerd

      "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."

      Did you miss that part of the article? The sample size is far too small to make a fair judgment of how gun laws affect mass killings.

      All kinds of "big event" tragedies will occur occasionally and kill a lot of people at once, be they plane crashes, tsunamis, or psychopaths on a rampage. You do what you can to limit them, but you can't just knee-jerk outlaw everything in the name of saving lives. The rest of us have to go on living.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:50 pm | Report abuse |
  83. J

    Obviously, yes. If you can't walk into a store and buy guns, it would make it much, much tougher to...buy guns...kill people.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:41 pm | Report abuse |
  84. glenview0818

    The first thing to do is to remove all identity and human characteristics from the perpetrators, then execute them immediately. We know who they are, no need for 20 years on death row. Refer to them as "antisocial loaner nut job #3" and erase their existence in the history books, and burn their house down with all contents inside. DO NOT allow them any notoriety, that is all they want. Giving them what they want will only create more, here me news media, do not give them what they want as you are enabling them!

    July 21, 2012 at 4:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • lolwut

      These guy's want to be killed it adds to their narcissistic fantasies of martyrdom and notoreity. If he rots away in silence inside a prison cell forever he will be forgotten. They are cowards who can't face living in a prison forever.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • glenview0818

      And another thing, what is with this goofball picture the media is using, there is no way that a better photo does not exist. Just another case of the media enabling these sick people.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Report abuse |
  85. Len

    Paranoid schizophrenics who are untreated are a public health risk. If they have been appropriately diagnosed they should be required by law to take their medication, just as a person with drug resistent tuberculosis would be. If they refuse to come in for their medication under supervision they should be involuntarily committed.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:35 pm | Report abuse |
  86. Turd Furgeson

    The #1 motivation for almost all spree killers and high profile murderers is fame. Luka Magnotta, Breivik, Cho, Klebold clowns these guy's all want to be infamous to feed their narcissism. If the media didn't blow this up to national 24/7 saturated coverage nobody would know who this guy is, it'd just be another nut with a gun and stories could focus on the good people who died but instead now everybody wants to know his manifesto, his reasons for doing this, all about his life... this is exactly what he wanted. Cult of the celebrity breeds this kind of insane narcissism.

    Right now there's a nut who's off his meds watching all this saturation and preparing to upstage him so he can be infamous too. Breivik 2.0

    July 21, 2012 at 4:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • Darren

      Bingo. Stop giving them the publicity. Stop splashing their pics all over the news. Stop profiling them. It won't stop it, but it could stop one.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:50 pm | Report abuse |
  87. Dave

    The people of this country need to demand an end to the sale of assualt weapons and high capactiy magazines. Neither of these is necessary to defend your home or use in hunting. All they do is provide nut jobs a means to kill more people. One of the rounds fired in the theater went through the wall and wounded someone in the theater next door. Complete insanity.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Turd Furgeson

      I agree there's no use for military weapons in civillian hands, but remember that nutbar Cho killed 2x as many people as this guy did using only 2 handguns he trained himself to reload quickly.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cynical Vet

      Your argument's so lame it needs a wheelchair and is riddled with falsehoods and liberal brainwashing and dogma. Besides, what's NEED got to do with it....suppose I WANT a high capacity magazine and an "assault weapon" as you laughably call it, which tells me you've probably never fired a weapon let alone served in any capacity other than maybe the Cub Scouts.

      I submit that we offer the option for EVERYONE to carry concealed or open, their choice. Everywhere this has been put into affect, violent crime has dropped. Yes, I carry. No, there's very little I could've done at that theater considering how "well executed" the sick plan was.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • pacoder

        So what your saying is you have no interest in having a rational conversation with the other side whereby we all might come to agreement that require both sides to make some sacrifices to make our citizens and our children safe from nut jobs with guns. It's exactly this kind of running off at the mouth instead of constructive discourse that has left our politica system in gridlock. I have however come to the sad realization that most of our citizens don't have the intellectual capacity to be able to rise above their emotions and try to make a reasoned attempt to do what's best for everyone that require compromise on both sides. Instead they only gratify their own passions and emotions which are being stirred up and guided by the political elite. Thanks for proving that point to me again. I needed reminding.

        July 21, 2012 at 4:52 pm | Report abuse |
      • GRM

        I ❤ crossfire.

        July 21, 2012 at 5:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • helensadornmentsblog

      Totally agree with this.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • Minerrranfan

      Do you understand that there are already 10's if not 100's of millions of "assault rifles" in the U.S. Banning the sale will not do anything if your thesis is that assault weapons lead cause mass killings. If you are saying that the government should confiscate assault weapons, then you are proposing a full on overthrow of the government.

      July 21, 2012 at 8:03 pm | Report abuse |
  88. Cindy

    We don't seem to be getting better at stopping this terrible kind of violence. Why is that? Where are our politicians when it comes time to protect our citizens? It is time. We are tired of the repetition Forget our differences because all people want a safer world.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Howard

      Indeed. It's way past time for all Americans to wake up to two facts and then demand that their elected representatives stand up to the NRA and vote accordingly.

      Fact 1: Reasonable gun control does not have to mean elimination of guns for hunting or self-defense.
      Fact. 2: No one in their right mind uses a rapid fire extra rounds capacity weapon for hunting or self-defense.

      If only these weapons were outlawed from further manufacture and sale, and existing ownership forced to surrender them within a few years time, we could gradually eliminate the means of nearly all mass murders. No one has ever attacked a theater crowd wit knives, for pete's sake.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • Minerrranfan

        I used an AR-10 to hunt hogs a few months ago. Having 20 rounds per magazine greatly enhanced the hunt.

        July 21, 2012 at 8:08 pm | Report abuse |
        • Howard

          Then allow this hunter, trained on a single shot rifle, to tell you that what you call hunting isn't a sport, it's just a slaughter and proof of your own incompetence as a hunter.

          July 21, 2012 at 8:56 pm | Report abuse |
  89. Paul

    I have not read any of the previous posts. This is from my own personal profile on another site:

    After reading just about every major news source on the web I am surprised ALL movie theaters have not been put on lock-down to "reassess security protocols". What security? They have ticket vendors, snack vendors, and teenage ushers. No metal detectors. No armed guards (though once when "The Song Remains The Same" had a midnight showing I saw a police officer... 30 years ago). Why stop at theaters? Malls are just as vulnerable, so are supermarkets and restaurants.

    Should there be metal detectors at every pubic place? Should armed security be stationed throughout the malls, supermarkets, and movie and stage theaters?

    The people of Israel have many of the above security measures in place due to their history of terrorist attacks on what are called 'soft targets' (non-military). They've also learned to be 'street smart' and pick up on something potentially dangerous and alert authorities in case they are correct. Survival, plain and simple.

    So is this where we're headed? Because I tell you, from historical perspective, outlawing guns is NOT going to stop gun violence. As a matter of fact, it will more than likely make it more prevalent. It's become a cliché but it is true: When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. AND THEY WILL HAVE THEM. Make no mistake,

    I have no answer other than to say you cannot prevent crazy. One news source said the killer was "a graduate student at a nearby college with a clean arrest record"... well that tells me nothing about him but a lot about our now once again attacked gun policies.

    There were no red lights on this guy and nothing to prevent him from purchasing the guns he had. You cannot ascertain crazy until someone does something crazy. If they 'hold it in' or 'contain it' while all the while stocking up on guns and ammo and riot gear (much of the latter you can buy online with no trouble at all) there is NO LAW or BAN or PROCEDURE that can stop people like that.

    Worst of all is the blame being put on the movie. BATMAN did not cause this. It could have been any midnight showing. Claims the killer dressed as the Joker have been proven false, as I am sure reports that he identified himself as The Joker will be proven false. He could have called himself Papa Smurf for all we know!

    A single horrific act by a deranged lunatic. That is all there is to know. The rest is just the sad stories of those who died, the ongoing struggles of those who survived, and the endless endless analysis by the media which profits via viewership off of such horrible crimes.

    Thank you.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ken Trashaw

      " When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. AND THEY WILL HAVE THEM. Make no mistake"

      Thank you Paul, by taking the focus away from the individual who pulled the trigger and away from the fact that the man was easily able to purchase an assault rifle which he used to (not defend himself) but do what it was designed to do which was mass killing as you have effectively quieted the debate around why this has occurred. If you don't care enough to stop people from purchasing this tools of mass killing then why is this an outrage you hypocrite ? Your effectively saying that nothing wrong happened here, these people were the collateral damage of one persons choice and not the system which has been set in place which would allow for this choice to be chosen. If assult rifles were outlawed would he has still be able to kill many people, YES, but not on such a mass scale.

      Oh but public spaces need to be protected ? So now its the victims faults for going to see the show ? Grow up, this is not a trend but a symptom of a much larger problem which the media and people like yourselves don't seem to care about.

      As you said, he was a PHD student, he was not a dumb person, or an evil person, he was successful like you and I, he hadn't had a run in with the law before because the man was a law abiding gun owner and citizen. Whatever the reasons which lead to the tragedy, no one can say that the assault rifle didn't do its job, its manufacturers should be happy, but every single human being in our country who thinks this tragedy was a national shame should be horrified that someone can go out tomorrow buy an AR15 and repeat the same tragedy as if nothing happened – failure to address this obvious hypocrisy of morality makes me sick.

      I know you probably care about these victims, but your comment comes off as smug and arrogant. Will outlaws always have guns, sure, but do they have to be assault rifles which can fire armor piercing rounds at over 30 shots per second? Grow up son, or take off your daddy's shoes, this is a real problem and people like you are the type that will sweep this under the rug and allow it to happen again. You may not be a Christian but at least try to show some love for your neighbor.

      Hasn't Colorado seen enough blood shed ?

      July 21, 2012 at 4:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • AK

        They do in Mexico, Ken. Not the five or six handguns bought from Bubbas and smuggled over the border. Real military weapons. Machine guns – real ones, not the semi-knockoff that psycho used. Grenade launchers. Explosives. Weapons smuggled in by the planeload from Israel or South Africa through Central America. Check Mexico's gun laws. They would bring tears of envy to the oyster-like eyes of Soros or Bloomberg.

        Pass your gun laws if you want. Ban anything you like. May stop a psycho or two over a course of years. What you'll get in return is not a good trade. W

        July 21, 2012 at 5:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • lbpauline

      Agree 100%. In some high schools there are already metal detectors. If I'm not wrong they are in Detroit.
      I'm thinking of this guy's parents: they could give some clues about their son. They know him and what's wrong with him. Although having some information about his personality might seem too late, in effect it might be helpful for a future study of such individuals' behavior, and, maybe, to learn when to be alerted.
      For example why did he apply for a doctorate in Neuroscience? This is a discipline that explores the treatment of several illnesses, and, between them, schizophrenia. This is, to me, a red flag, because I think that this guy is schizophrenic. Saying this I do not mean that he is less guilty, and that, overall, all who study Neuroscience might be sick. I mean that it is a weird coincidence, and I do not believe in coincidences.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • lbpauline

      I answered you, but for some reason my reply was posted by itself. It begins with "I agree 100%". Thanks.

      July 21, 2012 at 5:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • Tracey

      Wow Paul, way to come off as an asinine ill informed coward. You are really the reason why liberals want more gun control in this country. I would ask that you don't share your views on gun control because people like you make us all look like deranged lunatics.

      "A single horrific act by a deranged lunatic. That is all there is to know. The rest is just the sad stories of those who died, the ongoing struggles of those who survived"

      A deranged lunatic? Is that what your going to chalk this up to ? Walk away and turn off the tv and let these sad "stories" and "struggles" go on outside of your conscious? Flip the channel and watch some football? Colorado has seen this before and since nothing was done since the last time the nation turned a blind eye to this problem there is no reason to think it wouldn't happen again God forbid.

      When the company for the AR-15 said it followed the law are you happy ? Does this make the shootings right ? If this bastard wasn't able to buy this weapon and went in there with his glocks more people would be able to run out and less of these sad stories would be litering your tv and getting in the way of your football watching. Since everything was legal I guess this wasn't preventable and everythings ok then, your callousness and ignorance is only tempered by the fact that you must be either a child or just some cock from another state who doesn't have to deal with this type of tragedy and who is left free to idealize your gun fetish and your addiction to death. Nothing is wrong with guns, but when you can purchase something that can commit this much mayhem then who are we to question how people use it? is that what your saying.

      Take some responsibility for failing to use your brain before you post some garbage like this instead of making smug comments like "from a historical perspective" "make no mistake". Don't use words you don't understand or make sweeping statements which you cannot back up, it makes you look dumb and people who own guns look dumb, stop it now.

      And hows this for a historical perspective. Chicago has had over 228 gun deaths so far this year. Toronto Canada, where guns are outlawed has had 30. Its safer for Americans in Kabul where only 144 deaths have occurred. What history are you talking about? Why be such a smug you know what about a tragedy like this, do you have no heart or conscious?

      July 21, 2012 at 5:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • Edward

        Guns are not outlawed in Canada.....even handguns of a certain type are allowed...their laws are more restrictive

        July 21, 2012 at 6:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • Minerrranfan

        Chicago and D.C. have the most restrictive gun laws in the U.S. and the highest murder rates. Gun control does not stop gun violence.

        July 21, 2012 at 8:12 pm | Report abuse |
  90. Jane

    Since the last 7 or so mass shootings in the US have NOT been done by 'gangsters' and/or 'drug dealers', but by regular U.S. citizens who had absolutely no problems amassing ridiculous numbers of firepower (e.g., the Colorado shooter bought all that ammo ON LINE) yes, this could probably be ameliorated, if not eliminated with some common sense and human decency. Ithink it can be stipulated that people who feel the need to acquire AK47s and Glocks are NOT having their Second Amendment rights trampled on. It's also very sad that no one in power in Washington has seen fit to mention that Second Amendment rights differ slightly in 2006 from 1796. Don't see a lot of Muskets being used in these killings, do we?

    July 21, 2012 at 4:26 pm | Report abuse |
  91. Robin

    Well of course "there's very little society can do to put an end to all acts of senseless violence". ALL is the key word here. I don't think that anyone with half a brain would think we can end ALL acts of senseless violence. How about just having a goal of not outpacing the rest of the world by leaps and bounds? Other countries have just as many guns, but nowhere near the number of gun-related deaths. So clearly there IS something we can learn or something we can do.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Adventure49

      I don't agree that "there's very little society can do to put an end to all acts of senseless violence." There are societies that have very low rates of senseless violence. Perhaps we should be looking at the question, how could are society change so that we have fewer acts of senseless violence.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:29 pm | Report abuse |
  92. Virginia

    they can be minimal damage at best...how about teaching social skills in highschool...how to get your needs met with out resorting to violance...intimidation of others, a force courtion to get one's way dispite the wellbeing or rights of others feelings...

    I think the lack of social skills is the problem every one is resorting to violance and intimidation tactics to get there way even when the wrong thing to do...a bit of evil after a while can be alot of evil for one individual to keep all bottled up...people tent to block emotional responses to the actions of other then empathy for other dessapears causing tragedyi's like this one...if you see someone emtotionall abussing others its time to say that's not right...

    July 21, 2012 at 4:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Robin

      That's the problem. High school is WAY (and I mean WAY) too late. Prosocial skills start in infancy, and take solid hold before kids are five.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:26 pm | Report abuse |
  93. M. Meyers

    There is little doubt that the wall to wall news coverage is responsible for the next tragedy. There is a symbionic relationship between the murderer and all of the news agencies. What may be sicker than the shooter is that I'm sure the News agencies know exactly what there doing. As as been suggested, the three things that should never be violated is that, a picture of the shooter should never be shown and the name should never be used after the first day and only negative adjectives should be used to describe the shooter.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:14 pm | Report abuse |
  94. Adventure49

    I'm bothered by the claim that somehow mass murder comes from ones genes. If there is common denominator among mass murderers it seems to be that they suffer from narcissistic personality disorder. When this guy started to find out that grad school was tougher than he anticiapted he realized he wasn't the saivor of the world. I guess he decided that if he couldn't be Batman then he would rather be the Joker instead of one more extra in the crowd.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • John W

      You may be bothered by it, but nature – rather than nurture – has the most profound influence on our humanity.

      We, as part of a vast ecosystem that has been in place for millions of years, have good and bad baked in. It is, indeed, what drives us as a species, and as another cog in the Great Big Machine. If there is no progress, the species will cease to exist. If we had no issues to deal with daily, we would not strive to survive.

      You can't argue being kind and compassionate is a part of us, but being ruthlessly protective of our mortality isn't. Ying-yang, push-pull, dark-light. It's who we are, and who we have to be. In a case like this, the clearly troubled shooter is, for him, protecting himself, even if he sees getting back – revenge – as the way. We naturally view that as twisted because if . What it does for the rest of us, is galvanize our resolve to be better, and to offer compassion. It provides fuel for doing good.

      You might not like that, and I sure don't feel certain comfort by it in times like this, but it's our reality.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • Adventure49

        We are a product our nature, however we also have the ability to choose. Our choices are probably most influenced by our nurturing and how we see ourselves fitting into the world. Being ruthless may be part of our genetics, but it is ruthlessness with a purpose. I do not believe these murders served any purpose other than striking out in response to an attack on the perpetrators self image.

        July 21, 2012 at 4:49 pm | Report abuse |
  95. Mr. Peanut

    Guns are nothing more than an extension of a mans phallus.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:09 pm | Report abuse |
  96. g2-554d155ee0aaa518e03a7e70d9cd6b0b

    Has there been a "mass shooting" prevented by someone who happened to be standing there with another gun to stop it?

    July 21, 2012 at 4:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • John W

      Just what we need. Shootout at the OK Movie Theater. How can you possibly put your faith in another individual – or thousands of individuals – who you know absolutely nothing about, to do the right thing. Or even have the skills to make it happen. Would you suggest every single person in this great country have mandatory gun-handling lessons? And have the system in place to weed out the ones who might crack or aren't good enough to handle more than a stout stick? If this were about baking cakes, the "shoot-out" might make sense. But this doesn't at all. Guns are lethal by design. They are not supposed to be in the hands of everyone. If there is no rational way to make that happen, the next best thing is to tighten up on regulations.

      This psycho should never have been able to buy an assault weapon (how big a bear do you really need to be prepared to kill??), let alone two!, and the other cache he so easily acquired. Defense is certainly our right, but it is not in the best interest of anyone to allow this kind of thing to happen.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • chookeh

        John, I don't think this is "natural" at all. Humanity is being manipulated constantly by the PTB, and one thing is for certain, more and more people are waking up to it.

        July 21, 2012 at 8:09 pm | Report abuse |
        • John W

          We surely don't like to think so, but history – from the very beginning – is not on that side of the argument. It's heartening to know with all the people on the planet, it's not as bad as it could be.

          July 21, 2012 at 8:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rw

      Hard to say, but maybe the robbery in the internet cafe last week

      July 21, 2012 at 5:26 pm | Report abuse |
  97. Snoopy

    It's like asking if karma can be stopped. America will only continue to get worse until some real measures are taken. How is it possible that a persons right to a firearm is more protected than my right to live a life. Guns make it way to easy to take a life. I don't understand Christians that support guns. I guess they have to have some extension of their manhood.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • Adventure49

      I heard an expert on eastern religions say that Karma if correctly translated would most closely be "ones own doing." If you want to look towards his Karma, perhaps you should look at his life and what and who brought him to this point.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • Travis

      So you want to ban the right to bear arms so that only criminals have them.....brilliant strategy.....must be a liberal.

      July 21, 2012 at 4:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • thetruth

      What do Christians have to do with any of this? ......always some wack posting....

      July 21, 2012 at 4:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • chookeh

      Most genocides take place against dis-armed nations. As bad as this is, you NEVER want to be an unarmed nation, especially with the Track Record of the US Government. I do not doubt for a second that this government that has been in charge in the US for the last 20-30 years would hesitate to clean out Americans if it could. What do you think these last 10 years have been about? They've been dismantling the Constituion. One of the Supreme Court Justices, Ginsberg, has openly said the South African Constitution is better than the US.

      In other words, the enemy of Americans are within (not external), but they are not the citizens but the idiots passing the laws which are destroying our nation.

      July 21, 2012 at 8:14 pm | Report abuse |
  98. Darren

    One big step towards stopping these rampages is for the media to be more responsible. The main picture above this article is the killer, and his name appears first in the caption. One thing these crazy people want is "fame". When we stop "rewarding" them for their act, there will be one less motivational factor.

    July 21, 2012 at 4:01 pm | Report abuse |
  99. Derp McHurp

    More access to mental health support services and early diagnosis. These guy's don't just wake up one day and decided to kill hundreds of people, there's warning signs their whole life.

    The easy solution is to arm absolutely everybody, so next time some guy tries this you can shoot him without waiting for the police but I don't see how it would've helped in this case. He came prepared with gas to incapacitate, body armour and kevlar. Maybe even more people would've died in the theatre if it had turned into a wild shooitng gallery, or maybe somebody would get lucky and kill this guy like in Israel when an armed civillian shot a terrorist who hijacked a bulldozer to ram into buildings.

    July 21, 2012 at 3:58 pm | Report abuse |
  100. Canadannie

    I have believed for a long time that the media is part of the problem of the violence that happens in the world. The media has every right to publish the facts of crimes, wars, political events and all "news" that the public has the right to know. However, after this latest situation that happened last night in Colorado it seems to me that perpetrators of these acts of violence get exactly what they are looking for – publicity and notoriety. If the media would simply publish the facts when these events happen and then cease until the people responsible for these acts are eventually tried, then surely would-be copy cats may think twice, knowing they are not going to get the publicity and notoriety they crave.
    The media should stop calling what has happened in Colorado a massacre. Yes, of course that is exactly what it was, but the young man who is alleged to be the shooter, in his crazy mind, must be loving his atrocious act called that. C.N.N. will probably have 24 hour a day coverage for at least the next week. So much of what they report is pure speculation. However, they are not the only television newscasters who go to these extremes. We have far too much coverage here in Canada. Yes, we have a need to know, but not to the extent that media outlets go to in this day and age. There have been far too many shootings in schools, universities and public places. All have been covered to the extreme and it is time the media look to themselves and ask "Are we in any sense to blame for shootings that have yet to occur"? I am pretty sure journalists will be horrified by my suggestions but I am convinced there would be fewer tragedies if the would be perpetrators knew that they would not gain any fame or glory in what they plan to do. Rather than concentrate on the how, the why, the what went so wrong in the life of the shooter, spend more time, if you must, on talking about those who have lost their lives or been wounded. Other than mentioning the name of the alleged criminal in the first instance, never publish his/her name again, always refer to him/her as "the shooter". They do not deserve publicity.
    It is doubtful whether anything can be done about banning all guns and ammunition but something has to be done and I would respectfully suggest that all media should look a little closer at how they report these horrific acts.

    July 21, 2012 at 3:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Derp McHurp

      I also agree, these guy's get infamous from the media exploiting these attacks to full worldwide notoreity. Cho the Vtech shooter was definitely influenced from the columbine shootings, guess this guy was influenced by Breivik media saturation and his own madness. There was another nut in Canada who imitated the armored car scene in the last batman movie, claiming he was the joker too. Look up Travis Baumgartner

      July 21, 2012 at 4:02 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3