Robert Ringer

Aurora: The gun-control debate goes on.

By Robert Ringer - Saturday, July 21, 2012

Well, here we are again.  It’s been 13 years since Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed 13 students at Columbine High School in Colorado … five years since Seung-Hui Cho slaughtered 32 students and faculty members at Virginia Tech … now 12 dead in an Aurora, Colorado movie theater at the hands of a mentally deranged graduate-school dropout by the name of James Holmes.

As disconcerting as it is to contemplate, we can all agree that there will be more mass slayings in the future.  Aurora, like Columbine, Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, and many others before it, was a terrible tragedy.  The grief and sorrow of the family members of the victims is impossible for those of us who have not been touched by such a tragedy to comprehend.

Unfortunately, as expected, immediately after news of the Aurora tragedy flashed across our television screens, gun-control advocates started banging away on the anti-gun drums.  I totally understand their emotional reaction, but that’s precisely the problem:  Their reaction is based on emotion rather than logic.

Like millions of other Americans, I see the problem as there being too few guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens.  I agree with Rep. Allen West (R-FL), who said that if the government is going to mandate that people purchase medical insurance, they should also mandate that everyone buy a Glock 9mm handgun.

In all seriousness, I don’t believe the government has a right to mandate that any citizen buy anything, but I certainly would like to see as many non-criminals as possible carrying concealed weapons.  Just owning a weapon doesn’t cut it.  You have to have it with you when some nut walks into a fast-food place and starts shooting people.

The age-old anti-gun argument is that if everyone carried a gun, minor disagreements would turn into gunfights.  I have seen zero evidence of this.  In fact, though there are probably some cases I’m not aware of, I, personally, have never heard of anyone with a concealed-weapon permit pulling out a gun and randomly killing people.

On the other side of the coin, if a half dozen kids (and the instructor) had been carrying concealed weapons at Virginia Tech, can there be any doubt in a rational person’s mind that the carnage would have been far less?  How about 10 dead instead of 32?  Or 15 dead instead of 32?  Or even 20 dead instead of 32?  Even the latter would have meant that 12 innocent people would still be alive.

Ditto with Aurora.  Had half the people in the theater been carrying concealed weapons (which the theater itself disallows!), perhaps that poor, demented young man who carried out the savage attack on human life would have been stopped at six dead and 20 wounded instead of 12 dead and 58 wounded.  That would have been six people who would still be alive and 38 who would not have been wounded.

I admit it, I’ve never understood the logic of the anti-gun folks.  But, then, I’ve never understood most of the things those on the far left believe in.  Maybe I’m just missing something.  If so, can anyone help straighten me out on this?

Either way, may those innocent souls who were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time in Aurora, Colorado rest in peace.


You have permission to reprint this article so long as you place the following wording at the end of the article:

Copyright © 2019 Robert Ringer
ROBERT RINGER is a New York Times #1 bestselling author and host of the highly acclaimed Liberty Education Interview Series, which features interviews with top political, economic, and social leaders. He has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business, The Tonight Show, Today, The Dennis Miller Show, Good Morning America, The Lars Larson Show, ABC Nightline, and The Charlie Rose Show, and has been the subject of feature articles in such major publications as Time, People, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Barron's, and The New York Times.

To sign up for his one-of-a-kind, pro-liberty e-letter, A Voice of Sanity, Click Here.

Respond to Writer

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints. Make your case passionately, but please keep your comments civil and to the point (maximum of 1500 characters). Obscene, profane, abusive, or off-topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked.

If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion. Thanks for your participation.

52 Responses to “Aurora: The gun-control debate goes on.”

  1. Lara says:

    It's so true. The second incident at Virginia Tech sank without a trace because two of the students were armed and effective. The only reason why more people weren't slaughtered was because there were armed officers there. We should all be trained and armed…it would provide a more peaceful society.

    • topeka says:

      At Virginia Tech, I think Cho committed suicide.

      … btw a history of mental imbalance … not a political or religious thing.

      I think your thinking of the Appalachia Law shooting … My Torts prof was there that day.. two off duty officers ran to their cars, got their personal weapons CCW's and ran back and put an end to the crisis.

      … one down for spree killers and one up for law enforcement

      As an added side benefit – a Law Professor moved to the Center-Right on the Gun Control Issue…

      … yeah, reality check really does work…

  2. Common Sense says:

    James Holmes came prepared–it's been widely reported he was wearing all kinds of protective equipment.

    Still, I get your logic. Holmes was unusual in that he was pretty "bright". Vincent Bugliosi, the Charles Manson prosecutor said in an interview that most mass murders are of rather low intellect.

    • topeka says:

      Intellect and mass murder are relative terms…

      you can also be intelligent and flat crazy.

      like Charles Whitman (i think that's his name) – the marine who shot dozens from the UT tower in '66.

      In those days they were so politically incorrect they forgot to cover up the facts… the kid had a brain tumor and he was taking drugs to drown out "the voices in his head"

      Not saying it's right – but he was actually trying to seek treatment before he went loo loo – unlike most.

      also for the dipsticks – no I don't think actual mental illness explains any more than a significant fraction of these crimes. And I'm not trying to demean the mentally ill just b/c it's one possible cause of a heinous crime.

      you can tell I've posted b4…

    • Dau Tieng 59 says:

      No one without the experience is ready for return fire. Just having rounds hit in his general vicinity would be very disconcerting.

  3. Daniel Joseph says:

    I understand that the theater had posted “no-guns” signs. I don’t know if this was true but a local theater in my town has “no-gun” signs so maybe this theater did also. My initial thought when I first saw this sign in my town was: “this place might not be safe.”

    Was the theater a little less safe because of these “no-gun” signs? Many ex-law enforcement personnel don’t go places where can cannot carry their firearm. Many trained, responsible, concealed carry gun owners might have selected another theater that allowed concealed carry.

    Many crazy people understand consequences. Some don’t, but many do. Did this guy see the “no-gun” sign and know that it might be safer for him to do this in a “no-gun” theater than a theater without these signs?

    We do not know what he was thinking. Only honest, rational people honor these "no-gun" signs.

    I understand how politically incorrect it is to say this but the patrons who enter any establishment with a “no-gun" sign should interpret the “no-gun” sign as advertising that says this place might not be safe.

    There will certainly be lawsuits related to this. Maybe one of the lawsuits will include the rational thought that places with “no-gun” signs and policies discourage ex- and off-duty police officers, etc as patrons and are not safe.

  4. Jackson DeLand says:

    I carry, I have a permit, I WILL protect my family. I ignore most of the anti-carry notices. I'd rather judged by 12, than carries by 6. I do not drink when I carry and I pay attention to my surroundings. I believe in personal responsibility and religious morality. These practices are all contrary to the prevailing mentality of collective helplessness and dependance on the government. All we need to do is stand up and open our eyes to the dangers around us. If one believes in good, one MUST acknowledge evil, if one recognizes truth, one must see lies. We must be prepared for evil and lies.

    • Bryan says:

      Well spoke.

    • Erato says:

      Someone recently told me that when you have a permit you are upheld to a much stricter set of standards… in other words, the penalties for breaking the law with an un-permitted gun are much lighter. Does anyone know if this is true?

      • Erato says:

        correction: "the penalties for breaking the law with an un-permitted gun are much lighter" should read "the penalties for shooting an intruder with an un-permitted gun are much lighter".

        It's a big difference, I know… sorry for any confusion.

  5. Gill O’Teen says:

    We all know that people don't kill people, only guns kill people. By the standards of the actual guns, the ones used in this massacre have to be considered successful. But no gun can be successful on its own. If it drove itself to the theater. someone had to build its vehicle, the roads upon which it drove and the theater itself. Since, nowadays, all roads are funded by money looted by the political class, and many vehicles are only possible because they are subsidized by money looted by the political class, and because the political class currently is under the boot of the demon party, the loonie left deserves all the credit for the success of these brainless guns.

    By the way, this also proves that o'bummer did not kill ben leaded – a gun did.

    Colonel West is fond of Glock 9 mills? One more reason to like the man. Both my son and I like the 19.

    • topeka says:


      Are you saying that the deranged man who shot up the theater in Aurora didn't do that, somebody else did?


      Actually sarcasm aside – I think that is the Liberal's argument – only they believe it. They just can't figure out how to pin it on their enemies…

      btw… speaking of Glocks… had one pulled on me once…

      it focuses the mind like nothing else – one rush I don't to repeat

      • John Harvey says:

        I find a .357 revolver more to my liking than the Glock–simply because they are smaller, and neither me, nor my very small wife have to find the safety buttons to push. In my way of thinking, the first sound a criminal should hear is not the sound of the safety coming off, but the sound of the first round headed for his body.

  6. Marte says:

    It's been proven throughout history – when law abiding citizens carry guns, crime goes down.

    What is hard to comprehend is how political leaders (who supposedly have studied a bit of history) can even begin to believe that gun control is a good thing.

    ll it points to is the government's desire to rule over a populace that will be unable to defend itself. (There's a scary thought.)

  7. Kim says:

    A sound a valid argument. We here in Australia have had our share of similar tragedies.And while it's difficult to get a gun here legally it's simple to actually get one illegally. Banning the guns will not and has not made one iota of difference. If the "badguys" want a gun then all the posing,posturing and pontificating by the buffoon politicians will not make a shred of difference except to gather the votes of the fools that still chant and believe that tired old chestnut that "guns kill people"

  8. Alice In Wonderland says:

    "If so, can anyone help straighten me out on this?"

    You're already straight.

    "Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year — or about 6,850 times a day. This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives." GOA

    The fact of the matter is many criminal-vs-victim gun encounters go unreported, so the true number of encounters is not really known.

    The dying mainstream-news media rarely report on individuals who use guns in lawful self-defense, because the corporatized press have a collectivist agenda. This is why more and more gun owners are getting their news from alternative sources.

    For anybody who is not yet "straight" on this issue, I would advise purchasing some protection in the form of a gun along with an NRA & GOA membership. If you can afford to learn how to shoot "straight" in a gunfight by attending a top-notch facility such as Front Sight Firearms Training Institute, then go, because good firearm training will serve you well in a violent situation.

  9. CommonSenseInColo says:

    I agree with you a thousand percent – but the killer knew that there may be a concealed weapon holder in the audience, thus as the Wall Street reported "A gunman wearing a gas mask and sheathed head-to-toe in body armor opened fire in a theater". They are getting smarter and smarter – very disturbing. By-the-way: this meant he planned to kill – planned intent. A perfect case for the death penalty if there ever was one – thank God Colorado keep that law on the books.

  10. Stinger51 says:

    I have a solution for the Aurora, Colorado Cops, who are trying to disarm the apartment of the nut case who did all the shooting:


    Naw, makes to much sense. But that's the way the Chinese would do it.

  11. topeka says:

    1. Excellent comment – thanks.

    2. We are praying for the victims. This really made me physically ill Friday morning. And I had been hoping to see the flick… but now the idea makes me depressed…

    3. As for why they want gun control… I say it's hatred.

    • topeka says:

      It's based on hatred.

      If you do not want someone to have a gun… you must think they're a killer or deranged.

      If you think about it; we do want the same things the Left wants: For example, the Left education and the rest of us want education. We disagree because they hate.

      - we believe that some little kid a bunch of lies and NOT telling the kid some basic, hard won facts is "criminal" (ok, sorry for insulting criminals but you see what I mean.)

      - If you believe you need to tell some kid a bunch of lies that will lead him to a life of misery, poverty, hatred, etc, but will allow you to use his existence to further your political ends… what does that make you?

      Now Turn that around.

      - What do the Liberals have to believe in order to justify this?

      I call it "hatred" b/c there's really no good words for it on a family blog. No one in their right mind would do this. Yet Liberals have done it… Even to me, my ex, my kids…

      - you'd have to be the same kind of sick pervert that feels good about yourself when you hang someone with a different skin tone, or blow up Jews eating pizza to lie to a kid.

      - And that's what they think of us and guns.

      I have lived and worked with Liberal's daily. And they believe that people who own guns live to hate, kill, steal, and murder … to protect what they have stolen, lied about, or cheated to receive. ie – they hate.

      Often, to be fair … they are brainwashed …

      but how do you deprogram them?

  12. george says:

    The sad Truth of the matter is if a guy wants to commit mass murder he can probably do it. There are so many ways to do it and I don't think I need to list them here.

    What a tragedy for so many people. I especially feel for any parent who lost a son, or daughter, that night.

    I don't really want to carry a gun personally, but I don't mind when friends of mine inform me that they have a gun in their possession as a warning. Although when you think of the horror of being unarmed in a desperate situation and not having a gun. I definitely think guns are necessary for home defense. I will have to re-think the idea of a concealed weapons permit, it might be a good idea. Remember that guy about 10 years ago who was photographing Grizzlies in Alaska and was eaten along with his Girlfriend? Apparently the bear attacked earlier in the day, the guy played dead and the bear left, but came back later and did the killing. Even though they were forewarned, and scared they were no match for a crazy bear. The rangers found an audio recording of the attack. It was too frightening to be released to the public. The point is if you are entering bear country don't assume anything, go armed or have a defense plan it only takes one bad bear to ruin many lives. Mental illness seems to be widespread. Please enjoy your lives and protect your families.

    • YoOle Me says:

      In re: “I will have to re-think the idea of a concealed weapons permit, it might be a good idea.” … While you’re “thinking”; THINK about this:

      Your 2nd Amendment Right IS: “to keep and bear arms” and IT IS unalienable, as IT IS “ISSUED BY” God — NOT GOVERNMENT; AND it “shall not be infringed.” – Meaning, YOUR POSSESSION & BEARING OF ARMS IS IMMUTABLE BY ANY GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY, by Law!!! …


      NOW: IF your CONVICTION in conscientious substantive belief in the FIRST posit, is in any way faint, then, in the final analysis:


      • Oldawg says:

        I don't know about your state, but here in Florida when we apply for a concealed carry permit, no guns are listed. You can get a permit and not even have a gun. No guns are registered except with the dealer when purchased (if you buy thru a dealer).

  13. Scott says:

    I continue to recommended people read "The Cho Factor" series of articles by Mr. Ringer.

    We may never fully understand why certain people commit such horrific crimes however, "The Cho Factor" is helpful in shedding some light on this subject.

    We do seem to be living in strange and awful times; otherwise sane airline pilots going berzerk, record number of suicides among returning American troops, mass killings of innocents. All of this in spite of a record number of resources available to folks who need, but refuse help. Pary for the victims and survivors of this terrible tragedy.

    • YoOle Me says:

      >>> "We do seem to be living in strange and awful times;"

      … No doubt, albeit: "This ain't the first rodeo"!!! … See The Book of Amos, in Holy God's Scriptures, and for an excellent "Tour-guide" through the 9-short chapters:

      God Speed,
      YoOle Me

  14. Alice In Wonderland says:

    "I had been hoping to see the flick."

    As an aside, I find it most sickening and offensive that some individuals who attended that "flick" also brought along their infants and young children, subjecting them to scenes of gratuitous violence.

    Robbing young children of their childhood by filling their minds with "dark" trash at midnight is one of the reasons why America has become amerika. What is wrong with you people?

    A growing number of amerikans have an obsession for violent entertainment; this speaks volumes about their mental posture.

    amerika! A country obsessed with gladiatorial combat!

    Behold! amerika! your newest neo-Roman gladiator: The Dark Night!!! Quickly, now! Quickly! Ye neo-Romans, go and grab your little children and rush down so you can saturate your minds with demented trash at a midnight showing of garbage.

    In this type of environment is it any wonder why sane people have to own guns for self-protection?

  15. Daniela Todescu says:

    It is not about mental illness! that people know exactly what they*re doing! like the kamikaze it consider that it is a duty! somebody train them to do so! and from my humble point of view is the truth behind the Tavistock social crime apllyed study and so named Obama care with terror teacher free and atracting students in they*re network!

    It is looking more like the Russian Strip infuenza! As they have installed themselves in Jerusalim the Russian Compound they get a lot of money by the pilgrimage and in order to install the lawlessness instead the God Laws: MERCY NOT SACRIFICE! THEY DO WHAT THEY*RE DOING FROM SOO LONG, TO NAME A FEW OF THE LARGE LIST OF THE DEATH TREATY !

    II. Proletarians and Communists
    The section goes on to defend communism from various objections, such as the claim that communists advocate "FREE LOVE", and the claim that people will not perform labor in a communist society because they have no incentive to work. The section ends by outlining a set of short-term demands:

    1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.


  16. Liz says:

    I understand both sides of the gun control issue. I don't like firearms. I know they are meant to kill, whether for defense or sport. However, I think everyone should have access to as much weaponry as they want and we should all be educated in the use of weapons from an early age. I think both concealed and open carriage of firearms should be legal. I think if everyone is armed, not only would we all be safer but we'd all have better manners!

    • Oldawg says:

      You're exactly right Liz! I was raised in a small rural community where guns were common in most households, and we were taught gun safety at an early age. Gun crimes were rare and we didn't go around shooting at one another. It was a different mentality then. These days, I would not sleep at night if I had no means to deal with an armed intruder.

      One other point….not all guns are meant to kill….many are manufactured and purchased for use only on inanimate targets. Cowboy Action Shooting, Practical Pistol and Three Gun competition are very popular, as well as many types of organized target shooting.

      More and more people, especially women, are finding out this can be a lot of fun, as well as useful practice in gun handling.

  17. Daniela Todescu says:

    Tavistock- The Best Kept Secret in America

    Formed in 1947, the Tavistock Institute is an independent not-for-profit organization which seeks to combine research in the social sciences with professional practice. Problems of institution-building and organizational design and change are being tackled in all sectors – government, industry and commerce, health and welfare, education, etc. – nationally and internationally, and clients range from multinationals to small community groups. A growth area has been the use of a developmental approach to evaluation of new and experimental programs, particularly in health, education and community development. This has also produced new training events alongside the regular program of group relations conferences. The Institute owns and edits the monthly journal Human Relations (published by Plenum Press) which is now in its 48th year, and has recently launched (in conjunction with Sage Publications) a new journal Evaluation.

    Tavistock Institute is headquartered in London. Its prophet, Sigmond Freud, settled in Maresfield Gardens when he moved to England. He was given a mansion by Princess Bonaparte. Tavistock's pioneer work in behavioral science along Freudian lines of "controlling" humans established it as the world center of foundation ideology. Its network now extends from the University of Sussex to the U.S. through the Stanford Research Institute, Esalen, MIT,Heritage

    • duggy says:

      Tavistock no doubt tied to the families who own the fed…the fed/treasury criminal conspiracy is ruining the economy…creating ideal conditions for the PNAC freaks to create the amerikan dictatorship..

      The fed lends. …government spends

      Lets IRS extract to pay the lender back

      Demand the end of the "fed"

  18. Daniela Todescu says:

    The French Reign of Terror was directed, not against the aristocrats, many of whom were sympathetic to it, but against the small farmers who refused to turn over their grain to the revolutionary tribunals in exchange for the worthless assignats. In the United States, the foundations are presently engaged in the same type of war of extermination against the American farmer.

    The traditional formula of land plus labor for the farmer has been altered due to the farmer's need for purchasing power, to buy industrial goods needed in his farming operations. Because of this need for capital, the farmer is especially vulnerable to the World Order's manipulation of interest rates, which is bankrupting him. Just as in the Soviet Union, in the early 1930s, when Stalin ordered the Kulaks to give up their small plots of land to live and work on the collective farms, the American small farmer faces the same type of extermination, being forced to give up his small plot of land to become a hired hand for the big agricultural trusts. The Brookings Institution and other foundations originated the monetary programs implemented by the Federal Reserve System to destroy the American farmer, a replay of the Soviet tragedy in Russia, with one proviso that the farmer will be allowed to survive if he becomes a slave worker of the giant trusts.

    Once the citizen becomes aware of the true role of the foundations, he can understand the high interest rates, high taxes, the destruction of the family, the degradation of the churches into forums for revolution, the subversion of the universities into CIA cesspools of drug addiction, and the halls of government into sewers of international espionage and intrigue. The American citizen can now understand why every agent of the federal government is against him; the alphabet agencies, the FBI, IRS, CIA and BATF must make war on the citizen in order to carry out the programs of the foundations.

    • duggy says:

      Great post. .you mention the federal reserve bears asserting that the federal reserve is not federal…a private cartel of counterfeiters creating federal reserve notes from air and loansharking them to you via treasury..govt spends and irs extorts to pay back the "fed", a criminal syndicate, bribed into existence in 1913 and signed by woodrow wilson whose campaign was funded by the banksters who crafted the "fed" legislation. ….

  19. Susan Erwin says:

    My husband and I both have a concealed carry permit, and while I only occasionally carry my pistol on my person, my husband will not go anywhere without his! He's had extensive training in what to do in a crisis situation, such as the Aurora shooting. Before yesterday, I ragged him a little for feeling like he has to have something at all times, but not any more! I can assure you, if we're somewhere and someone starts shooting up the place….my husband will definitely help keep the injured and dead to a minimum!

  20. Just a short comment.. you ever think that the majority of democratic countries that have sane gun control laws have far fewer murders, suicides, etc.. than the U.S.? just a coincidence.. this stupid myth if everybody was packing then it wouldn't have been as bad… why let that nut arm himself like that in the first place??? But as soon as you suggest something even remotely sane like stopping a guy from ordering at thousand rounds online or machine guns aren't need for a hunting trip.. the NRA (which stand for Nuts Run Amok) flips out and says you're stepping on our second amendment rights!!!

  21. PAC says:

    Robert, I agree totally. Take that one step further. This may never happen, but imagine the consequences. What if gun possession was not banned, but encouraged aboard commercial air travel? Pilots did not even have a gun.

    911 would not have happened. Period. It might not have even been planned by the muslims.

    We would still have the world trade centers.

    We would still have the 5000 or so innocent victims of the attack.

    We would not have had the $ trillion economic loss.

    Worst case scenario – terrorist pulls a gun and kills a few passengers and is met with 20 to 30 armed travelers. Bad situation, but just a blip on the radar of history and not an event that will forever change our country.

    The unfortunate passengers of the last flight, AA 93, could not even defeat terrorists when they knew what was going to happen.

    911 is certainly the saddest example of yet another disaster in a gun-free zone.

  22. YoOle Me says:

    >>> "…you ever think that the majority of democratic countries that have sane gun control laws have far fewer murders, suicides, etc.. than the U.S.?" … As a matter of fact: NO!!!

    I've never thought that at all, since I've never seen factual substantiation for your posit, albeit: I have seen – up close & personal – where such "Democratic" countries' GOVERNMENT[S] PROVIDE ALL of the "far fewer murders, suicides, etc.. than the U.S.?" …

    Some how, I just seem to appreciate & prefer the public "Free enterprise" experience in that subject-matter vs. GOVERNMENT MONOPOLY in such!!!

  23. duggy says:

    Absolutely agree an armed public is a strong public. .not inclined to random violence. .in sc, everybody is polite. ..there are profuse carry permits..maybe everybody is polite because that's their nature and custom, but i think concealed carry is a factor….

    Our economy is tanking..bennie and timmy are robbing us blind:

    The Fed lends. ..govt spends

    Lets irs extract to pay the lender back

    Stop the ngo fed printing and lending bogus bux to treasury which cost all our taxbux

  24. Brent says:

    I've been avoiding the news over this. More of the same, it all comes down to the stupid vs the smart-as do all gun control issues. The people who want to ban guns love to use these instances to rally the stupid people and their sheer numbers (it is estimated that IQ averages in America are 98) for sheer volume of votes and noise. Propaganda, Hollywood and even the government itself are used to promote anti-gun rhetoric.

    Most of these gun crimes are happening where there are no guns allowed. Honest people are disarmed in post offices, military bases and schools. Theaters as well (nobody shot back at Abe Lincoln's killer either). This is the result of gun control. We all know that criminals do not care about any gun free zone. These people mostly figure they are going to die anyways. But to take out as many people as possible without getting shot in return, they rely on the anti-gun lobby and repay them with fresh arguments to make to the ignorant.

  25. Bryan says:

    As I recall, somewhere in Texas there is a town where most of the folks you see around town any given day are wearing a sidearm. And there is practically zero crime in that town. Hmmm. I wonder if there's a lesson in that?

  26. Tom D. says:

    I was interested to read in John Stossel's new book (NO, THEY CAN'T) that in England the number of thieves who break into homes while people are inside is much higher than in the USA, because thieves in England know such residents will not be armed. The possibility that a resident in America might have a gun makes many a thief here think twice about breaking and entering when they know people are inside.

  27. My daughter personally knows a young lady who was killed last year because of mishap caused by handling a gun kept at her boyfriend's home. These tragedies happen all the time because of accidents caused by people insisting they must have a gun at home to protect themselves. The risks, in my opinion, of having guns on hand, far outweigh the few instances in which a gun could be useful. The right to bear arms by citizens was a concept created hundreds of years ago. It's outdated. Ordinary citizens should not have the right to go in and buy guns in my view.

  28. Jason says:

    Gun cortrol works, but all the evidence is outside the USA so you will never know.

    Of course criminals still have guns, but the amount of deaths caused by guns in Australia has dropped dramatically with gun control. And as for shootings like this one ….. none.

    • Anthony says:

      Yeah your right Jason. In Australia we had a multiple hand gun deaths (more than 5 killed in one scenario) every year for decades leading up to 1996. In 1996 there was the "Port Arthur Massacre" in Tasmania where over 30 people were killed by a madman with guns. The New Conservative Government bought in a "buy back Scheme" and took hundreds of thousands of guns off the streets.

      16 years in a row we have not reached 5 deaths by hand guns. 16/16 because there are less guns. How can that be argued with?

      The US – unfortunately is blinded by this.

      I don't know how the USA can tolerate 8,700/year of their citizens being murdered by handguns ever year when in any Western Country their number is less than 100 (even taking into calculation the US's large population 8,700 is an absolute disgrace and a total break down of civil society).

      The rest of the World just feels very sad for Americans and their obsession with guns.

      • reunion says:

        remember the national socialist's false flag burning of the reichstag? it was the excuse to disarm any potential opposition. the weimar republic passed "laws" disarming the jews. then came "kristallnacht", & threat of 20 year concentration camp sentences for any jew caught with a gun. occupied france, other countries, registration lists of gun owners, from police departments, made confiscation easy; gun owners that did not forfeit their ability to defend themselves, by turning in their weapons within 24 hours, were shot. the warsaw ghetto defense was begun with just a half dozen "illegal" handguns.

        contrast with the swiss confederation (in place since 1291, and a short-lived model in/for america, until forcibly "abandoned" in favor of amerika).

        this is just one exemplar of why it's essential to own, know how to use tools known as weapons. ability to dispose of garden variety criminals is just a bonus.

        your cites of aussie incidents were resultant same cause as aurora: not enough individuals jealous of their inalienable right to self-defense, nor responsible enough to fulfill their obligation of self-defense.

        ovines (lots of sheep in oz, right?) get sheared, slaughtered…and notice their lack of sympathy for each other, but hostility (thinly disguised as pity), for tool-owning non-sheep.

  29. Henry says:

    Whoah, some of these comments are disturbing. Americans don't own guns for hunting, or even for necessarily for protecting one's own home, but for the day, God forbid, when a certain, much larger enemy rears its head, as it tends to do a few times every century in some place or another. An armed population is the only thing that can keep such a monster in check.

    Aside, many find the shooting highly suspect being how that it came directly before the crazy UN BS vote regarding small arms. Examine the details, and don't be nieve.

  30. DKendra says:

    No one has yet mentioned that there are already thousands of gun-control laws on the books. Any one of those laws can be used to prove that they're useless against a highly determined person, whether criminal or mentally ill. Someone somewhere has already broken it. Such laws are pointless against anyone who ignores it. New laws won't fare any better.

    Also, these kinds of crimes have been going on for decades (remember the multiple and shocking murders in the 60s & 70s?). But because of the instantaneous nature of the Internet, such murders are known immediately outside their area. Add the sensationalistic form of current story-telling of the media (I won't call it journalism), and you have Brutus whipping the masses into a frenzy and letting mob rule take over.

    I did note the irony, however, that people take their kids to see violence in movies. Their excuse is "It's just a story and the bad guys lose." Then they're shocked when faced with REAL violence – because the bad guy is taking down REAL people.

    I don't believe for one minute that seeing the violence in movies or video games makes a person violent. Being violent in the manner of Holmes (and others) is a conscious if irrational choice.

    But, does seeing all of this darkness on a screen create a fantasy world of "It'll never happen here"? Does it leave people unprepared for real violence?

  31. Phyllis says:

    I am not going to read other posts and just make my thought on your question; these types of situations bring out in people other personalities that whether they are known to others are not are disturbing. My thought on this man is after his rampage it is extremely convenient to know he was seeing a medical professional who was treated him for depression, possible mental illness? Yet her never let law enforcement in Aurora know. Psychiatrist-patient confidentiality; right I get that too. Sixty people? Sorry folks, not buying that anymore. A doctor sees a patient, gauges their behavior and keeps silent AGAIN we hear this, they have a duty to report and tell.

    A man can buy a Glock, semi automatic assault combat weapon and it not be tracked anywhere by anyone in the US? Right, I get this, invades privacy of another; yet he can carefully sit at home planning an assault on 60+ in an dark enclosed movie theater as target practice? Really? This is not Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, or Vietnam; therefore, NO WAR in the US the last time I checked. He can walk in a theater and just open fire? Killing 12 and wounding 58 people playing a you character in the movie? Who again is this man's doctor??? Sorry folks,insanity just is NOT an option, as well as mental illness. He was a PhD student! Was he crazy while attending school? No, this man was mad at a University that failed him for flunking an exam! What else do you need to open your eyes and take a stand. Emotional distress not cool

  32. Michael says:

    This is how I feel about it. I put this sign up in my yard:
    See my front yard sign

  33. meantime, your that you know about every plus panorama of the web hosting bundle, so in a way they are gift you everything you demand to know around half of the image.

    electronic cigarette In case a website is usually down of the

    client keep at pre-sales.

Leave a Reply

To Receive Free Daily
Articles Via E-mail
Click Here

Featured Columnists

The Problem:
A Government-Created Depression
The Solution: Set the Entrepreneur Free to Create Wealth!

Click here to learn about Robert Ringer's landmark new book, The Entrepreneur:
The Way Back for the U.S. Economy
, that is shocking the establishment.

Liberty Education
Interview Series

Robert Ringer interviews top political, economic, and social leaders on today's most vital and controversial issues.

Dr. Benjamin Carson Interview

Featured Interview:
Dr. Benjamin Carson

Audio file loading...

More Interviews