Comments on: Colorado Shooting Suspect Not Cooperating
Newest First
By a on 07-21-12 @ 7:25 am
I just read the gunman had a 100 round clip. Now can we put in some gun control laws or does hisright to have a huge firearm arsenal trump these peoples lives? In this country, it does. After
all, we may need these guns to take over the governement like in 1776 and well, there will
always be a few casualities to the greater good of destroying the governement.
By Red Green on 07-21-12 @ 11:24 am
Gun control laws are nice words that are hollow. Like affordable housing…its a fallacy…an empty promise. Just words to make one feel better. Criminals will get guns
no matter what laws are in place. The black market exists no matter what. Laws will
just affect the price in the black market…NOT availability.
Vicariously, I feel this guys anger. I think there are many people who are angry about the
circumstance we live in now. The average Joe is effectively being screwed by the
politicians, bankers and insurance companies… Unfortunately, some act on their anger,
as this guy did and, short of living in a police-state, there just isn’t much that can be
done. Acts like this are too random to identify and prevent unless you want to live all of
your life like you do at the airport, with full-body scanners everywhere.
By hotfishmt on 07-21-12 @ 12:18 pm
I say a simple good string HIGH TREE, a good horse and a ROPE. Maybe for real, public hangings have a place. Shame is a good deterent, and not let the creep have endless years of
Public Defenders & humongus cost to find he is nuts.
A high IQ & close to idiot go hand in hand many times. My former brother in law, had a very high
IQ and a full ride to Cornell….flunked out after one semester, and to this day his high IQ has not
done him one bit of good.
He surrendered like a coward, and now has clamed up…..and I am sure he will spend the next 20
years…..with some loophole lawyer eating & sleeping away at the tax payers expense….gota have
a simple wish….that a BUBBA is his first & last cellmate.
I say show him a hangmans noose each day…scare him good & hope he has endless nightmares
& dies of a brain hemmorage.
By JB on 07-21-12 @ 3:58 pm
Taking one’s anger out on innocent victims is no excuse - this was a tragic event. This guy is no crazy psycho, either, contrary to what people would believe - everything he did was methodical and
planned out.
Having said that, it is truly naive to believe that banning high capacity magazines or ownership of
multiple firearms would have prevented this tragedy. However, if a law abiding citizen with a
concealed weapon were present, those lives could have been saved.
Banning gun ownership only disarms a law abiding populace - criminals will continue to carry and
use guns. Arming and training law abiding citizens in the proper use of firearms to save lives is
what is truly needed.
By bocephusj57 on 07-21-12 @ 4:56 pm
The theater is a “gun free zone” as company policy. Property rights, doncha know.
This interview with a firearms trainer of 29 years seems to be a fair assessment.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/07/20/could_an_armed_person_have_stopped_the_aurora_shooting_a_second_opinion_.html
I will go out on a limb and declare that Dems may do some hollering, but no gun laws (okay,
maybe one) will be presented for consideration in Congress.
After Gabbie Giffords and others were attacked Carolyn Maloney of NY proposed banning high
capacity clips. The bill went nowhere.
By JB on 07-22-12 @ 7:25 am
@bo - The theater’s “gun free zone” obviously failed to be an effective deterrent.
As for your going out on a limb - you would seem to be correct on that point:
http://www.nwherald.com/2012/07/22/calls-for-gun-control-stir-little-support/a6n9lx5/
I guess the NRA has a stranglehold on gun control legislation in Congress…thank goodness
By Gabby Johnson on 07-22-12 @ 3:08 pm
Under the assault weapon ban, this guy would have had to pause to swap out 10-round magazines,giving any hero in the crowd time to take him down. But thanks to our lawmakers, he could
continue shooting with a 100-round magazine and kill little girls and Navy vets and a lot of
young people who will never get to grow old.
He was prepared, covered with legal body armor, and anyone who had a gun and might have taken a
shot would have been sprayed with .223 rounds directed at the muzzle flash. Smart guy—he
complied with the law right up to the point he sent a bullet into his first victim.
The NRA position is to defend these animals.
Only a small fraction of gun owners abide with the NRA. We need to speak up. Tell our
politicians not to be afraid of the NRA,
By JB on 07-22-12 @ 3:27 pm
@Gabby - didn’t you read what was stated?? The theater is a “gun free zone” - that means even legal carry is not permitted, and anybody doing so is subject to arrest. Even if there was a
magazine limit law in effect, this guy would still have had his way.
You can’t legislate your way out of it - but you can clear the way for those affected people to take
responsibility to protect themselves - and a law abiding citizen with a gun could have saved lives
that day. Plain and simple.
No, its not perfect, but is IS effective.
By a on 07-22-12 @ 4:16 pm
Don’t forget guns don’t kill, this guy was using a teddy bear to do the killing. Wait, no, Ithink it was a gun with many bullets, could it be? No, guns don’t kill.
By JB on 07-22-12 @ 5:34 pm
@a - People kill people - if this guy used a bladed weapon it would not be treated any differently, and people would be yelling for tighter restrictions on blades…
There has to be someone behind the trigger, a - don’t forget that.
By a on 07-22-12 @ 7:56 pm
JB thank you so much for imforming me that someone pulled the trigger. Not only did he pull thetrigger, he pulled in on a gun that held 100 rounds. Now why are you defending this kind of
terrorism?
By JB on 07-22-12 @ 8:46 pm
Sorry. ..I thought that what i was defending was my 2nd Amendment rights -something you obviously know nothing about.
By a on 07-22-12 @ 9:55 pm
I guess you are right. The 2nd amendment justifies all these deaths. Thank you JB and the NRA.
By mitch on 07-22-12 @ 10:27 pm
If you think your 2nd amendment rights trump these people’s right to live a long and healthy life, you are just as crazy as this shooter. 2nd amendments rights mean Nothing to normal
people, as we’re not paranoid. Just because this was supposedly a “gun free zone” does not
mean there wasn’t someone else in the building with a gun. Track records show most people
(except of course law officers) would never respond as they would like to have other’s (or
themselves) think. More than likely there would have been even more deaths if some gun nut
is firing wildly. Give it up JB, let these people mourn their losses without hearing the
nonsense of “your gun rights”
By hotfishmt on 07-23-12 @ 6:44 am
In some other comments I made, I said that people that knew the “person, not man”, missed the signs that he was unstable & classmates, professors, friends, family….missed the boat on seeing
the man’s troubles.
BUT….a shooting range in Colorado, did not miss the signs. And, they did not even meet him, it
was his answering machine message. The shooter tried to join a gun range, the range’s owner
tried to call Holmes…and only got “quote” got a wierd message & gutteral message…and that
was enough….the owner of the range said to employee’s….if he shows up….get to him quickly &
don’t let him use the range. So, simple message on the answering machine…..was a TIP for the
gun range to stay clear. NOW….how come people that knew him….missed the mental basket
case??? Its like the high school dropout, they can see the writing on the wall….just can’t read it??
By montanaeasy56 on 07-23-12 @ 7:14 am
Ever notice how these nut-bags are such model citizens to all those around them…amazes me!
By a on 07-23-12 @ 8:12 am
So since the 2nd Amendment is all holy and everything, does that mean we can have machine gunsor guns that shoot down airplanes? How about guns that shoot grenades? What do you think? 100
round clip, no problem. why not just a machine gun? Come on, we are Americans. We are all holy
and rightous. After all we may have to refight the Revolution, or somthing like that.
By ICBM99 on 07-24-12 @ 3:12 pm
People that want to kill people will find a way. From the reports that I heard he could have easily brought in a bunch of pipe bombs in a backpack. Easily assembled from parts from a local
hardware store, and probably would have been more deadly. Should we ban hardware stores?
He also could have waited in the parking lot for the next big line of movie goers and run them all
down at 80 mph, and would have been just as deadly, should we ban cars? Or better yet maybe we
should ban all waiting line queues. Criminals manage to kill people in countries that have complete
gun bans. Look at Mexico, they have very strict gun laws, now the only people with guns are the
cartels, that seems to working out for them (the cartels) pretty well.
Someone mentioned that if he only had a 10 round magazine he could have been stopped. Do you
know how fast someone with a little bit of training can change a magazine? Less than 3 seconds.
And yes we just might have to have another revolution, heck it’s written into the declaration of
independence. Maybe not in yours or my lifetime, but imagine how much harder it will be for our
future generations if they aren’t allowed to carry arms.
By a on 07-24-12 @ 5:04 pm
Mexico gets guns from the United States of America. Mexico is bagging the US to make it harder. But no, we are to holy.
By thinker on 07-25-12 @ 6:48 am
The problem with any of our constitutional “rights” is that when they were written the obligations that we were to live up to were understood, as in speaking responsibly, knowing how and when to
use a gun to defend yourself or your family or for food, and that elected officials would actually act
for the best interests of the country.
Today, as communities and their social institutions get more fractured, all we hear about are
the “rights”. Perhaps if the Constitution were documented by liberals we could have a detailed,
micromanagement, explicit, every single little thing that you can and can’t do kind of thousands of
pages document that would stop everyone and everything in its tracks. They do seem to assume
that no one is capable of measuring their actions against a moral standard.
Our Founding Fathers assumed we would all be taught principles and ethics and how to apply that
to every day life. Unfortunately with our current system of education, that is no longer possible.
When even our presidents ignore what is ethical and moral, it’s no wonder the people go so far
astray.
By a on 07-25-12 @ 8:00 am
I wonder how our forefather would have written the 2nd amendment with billions of people on the earth, some of them nutty enough to shoot people in a movie theater. You can’t educate everyone to
the “high standard” of not gunning each other down so using some common sense should come into
play. Gun Control is common sense. We will not have a revolution against the government, we will
just have a mass a slaughter with all the arsenal.
By ICallB.S. on 07-25-12 @ 8:44 am
a: Our forefathers would be leading a second revolution right now if they were alive right now. I think most items in the Constitution would be the same. The Forefathers would be
appalled at the behavior of our government and legal system. That being said, Mr. Holmes
should be executed promptly. His biggest transgression was in murdering innocent people in a
theater. If he would have unloaded his 100 round clips into a full session of congress, he
would be a national hereo by now.
By a on 07-25-12 @ 9:00 am
Congress is being exetremely stupid in not passing gun control because it seems that the gunsthey aim to protect are aimed at them.
By hotfishmt on 07-25-12 @ 12:50 pm
On new gun laws….WHY? Reading the Seattle Times on line this morning….was a story about gun violence in that area. I would reccomend that you go an check out the story on GANG
shooting and what happened when they shooters get caught….set free with hardly a slap on the
wrist.
So…before you crank out new laws that are not enforced….take time to consider….new laws
sound good, read good…but, in all practical terms…..the Cops enforce and the Judges set them
FREE.
By JB on 07-25-12 @ 1:07 pm
Isn’t it interesting how the liberal camp seems to fall into the line of thinking that a new bunch of legislation is the solution to any problem that comes up??
Are you really so blind to believe that banning high capacity magazines/“assault” firearms will keep
criminals from obtaining them? IF YOU DO, THEN PROVE IT DEFINITIVELY - OTHERWISE YOU
HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS FOR ANY ARGUMENT REGARDING GUN LEGISLATION.
I will NEVER BE AFRAID OF DEFENDING MY SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS!!!!!!!!!
ARE YOU HEARING ME NOW - IS THIS SINKING IN?????
By a on 07-25-12 @ 7:40 pm
Magazine manufactures won’t make as many if they are outlawed, leaving less to get into the hands of criminals.
And hotfishmt, your argument is one that should be used to outlaw guns as a preventative measure.
By mitch on 07-25-12 @ 8:02 pm
woo hoo! JB is getting real serious now. Notice how he types all in caps? That means he’s angry. Are we impressed? Do we care?
By JB on 07-26-12 @ 6:36 am
@mitch - THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION.
Here’s a theory that’s been posited about this event in Aurora:
http://www.naturalnews.com/036536_James_Holmes_shooting_false_flag.html
Something I found VERY interesting:
Question: How does an unemployed medical student afford $20,000 in weapons, ammunition, and
tactical gear…not to mention the material for the devices found in his apartment?
Answer: He has the government pay for it.
How did this guy get his hands on 6,000 rounds of anmo? Does anybody realize how much 6,000
rounds of ammo cost? Not to mention the firearms needed to fire it?
Just waiting for the libtard antigunners to come out of the woodwork now…
By a on 07-26-12 @ 12:03 pm
How did this guy get his hands on 6,000 rounds of anmo? Good question. Maybe we could figureout a way to prevent it from happening. I am wth you on this one.
By montanaeasy56 on 07-26-12 @ 9:43 pm
JB…Me thinks you have been watching wayyyyy toooo much reality Tv if you believe all the hogwash to the link you posted…More conspiracy crap from whack jobs…same as the attack
on the Twin Towers being an “inside” job by our own government. What you appear to be
trying to get us to believe that the FBI staged this whole thing so that the administration would
have an easier sale at the Arms agreement talks…I think you need to go back to Alaska or
Minnnnnysota where the real kooks (Palin and Bachman) hang out.
By JB on 08-06-12 @ 1:37 am
@montanaeasy56 - Pretty easy for you to be dismissive of what surrounds this incident - I would think you suffer from cognitive dissonance - either that, or you believe the tripe served up by the
alphabet media….or both. FYI, I don’t waste my time watching TV, unlike some people…and only
your kind would want us “undesirables” to leave…I’m not going anywhere…so live with that. I hope
it makes you frickin’ twitch.
The violence inflicted by this gunman was specific and planned - with resources that were way
beyond his means as a student. And then Holmes waits for the police to find him near a car, after
doing what he did, and then tells them about his apartment, like he had a sudden change of heart?
Yeah, right…he suddenly felt sorry for what he did…give me a break. If he was truly psychotic, he
would not have cared at all…he would have kept shooting until the police killed him.
Holmes had no criminal record - and the weapons and ammo he acquired were legally obtained.
You want to believe that this guy was a wacko? If so, congrats for playing right into the bias of the
alphabet media, just like the good little lemmings you are.
By montanaeasy56 on 08-06-12 @ 6:46 am
JB…Hitler was very precise in what he had planned too…but yet, we all know now, even without the “alphabet” media that he was a friggin loon..Just becasue a lunatic shows remorse
doesn’t make him any less of a whack job.
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.