90 Comments

• seanomelb | Jul 25, 2012, 07:19 PM EDT

  McNamara it's not a political issue,it's a human life issue. I suggest you never wear a hoody.

• palmeiras | Jul 25, 2012, 02:52 PM EDT

  This is a shame for america; the rest of the world is having a good sneer. Your society is sick and even when a multiple shooting happens rarely in other countries(As it did in Norway) it is still influenced by the good old u.s.a thru the hollywood ultra violent industry. Now all you john waynes on this site, think about that; then again ya'll will probably buy another seven guns so as to double the national average. What a bunch of freaks.

• McNamara31 | Jul 24, 2012, 08:27 PM EDT

  borefield "How typical of the left wing liberals to turn this tragedy into a political control issue" ....Gimme a break with the "left wing stuff" This is a tragedy pure and simple.If you want to place blame, place it on the NRA lobby where it belongs.

• seanomelb | Jul 24, 2012, 08:23 PM EDT

  9000 people die in America from gunshot and the US cinema industry ban dress-ups and masks.Thank God!! I will not be shot by a mask but by the gun-totin gentleman in the three piece suit beside me packing a Glock

• EphraimKibbey | Jul 24, 2012, 12:20 AM EDT

  Gun violence is multi-causal and like so many of our current problems is not going to be solved with the gun control bandaids that I have seen offered. The new book out on the Columbine tragedy points to severe depression as the underlying cause there. The ineffective "War on Drugs" and the organised crime that takes advantage of it is the root of many of the Nation's shootings including those of innocent bystanders as well as gang members. When prohibition was repealed, much of the gang violence evaporated in our previous attempt to legislate morals. Then there are the individual murders for personal gain and accidental shootings. America is vast and diversely populated and the reasons for its extraordinary level of violence deep-rooted. If the patient is bleeding internally, a bandaid will only cover up the outward sign of the injury and give a false sense of having healed the wound. Better to operate and sew together the internal layers allowing true healing from the inside out.

• Curitiba | Jul 23, 2012, 05:40 PM EDT

  I'm not sure that bringing loaded guns into a cinema as a matter of routine is a good idea. What happens if the person in front of you won't turn off their mobile phone, or makes loud noises eating their popcorn and you both fall out? Would a simple punch-up turn into a shootout? The silliest argument for guns was when that student shot 30-odd people in Virginia and some gun dealer suggested that the problem was not that the shooter had access to ridiculous amounts of weaponry, it was that the students weren't armed in the classroom. I give up, was my first thought to that.

• eiriamach | Jul 23, 2012, 03:55 PM EDT

  This discussion reminds me of a scene in "Fort Apache the Bronx." Seeing a partner heavily armed, Murphy says, "What is this, the gunfight at the O.K. Corral?" Finley replies, "As long as there's cop killers around, pal, I'm gonna be ready." Murphy: "It don't make no difference how many guns you got. You only got two hands."

• tundish45 | Jul 23, 2012, 03:26 PM EDT

  Well, malpaso2001, since we are guessing about the theater crowd here's an equally valid story line to yours :"If even a few people in that theater had a gun we wouldnt be mourning 12 now. My story line is there were several with guns. All legal, all trained and all with varying amounts of luck and discipline. A guy a few rows back and across accurately sees what's happening and takes a clear shot, but is jostled and his bullet hits an innocent. A guy a bunch of rows back from him in the dark and smoke sees hero #1 shooting what seems like his second shot and takes a shot at him. Hits another innocent. A guy in the balcony sees hero #2 firing what he thinks is his third shot and fires down into the crowd. He puts down hero #3, who has a friend who now shoots up into the balcony. The guy in body armor continues to fire, untroubled by this other shooting. Yes, we would have been mouring a number different than 12.

• malpaso2001 | Jul 23, 2012, 12:48 PM EDT

  The problem is a "LACK" of guns, not the opposite. If even a few people in that theater had a gun we wouldnt be mourning 12 now. He might have gotten off a few rounds but then end of story for him. Statistics from the F.B.I. prove that in states where its legal to carry a weapon the crime rate is lower and not just by a bit, but by a serious margin. Go figure! And by the way, every year 720,000 Americans die from prescription drugs in hospital and another 200,00 plus at home. Thats almost a million innocent people dead from taking the correct amount of the drug as prescribed by a physician. Anyone crying about that stat? Thats a long way from 8875 from guns. Citizens have to stop been so easily led by those in the 99% that want us totally subservant to them. Interesting that ol' Bloomy wants all guns off the streets, yet he's surrounded by guns 24/7. I guess its a matter of "Im all right jack", the rest of you are on your own if anything happens.Some among us would have it that only the criminals and law enforcement are armed....which could be argued amounts to the same thing.!!

• Curitiba | Jul 23, 2012, 11:04 AM EDT

  Armies always have weaponry, so I'm not sure I understand your point, sunspotter5. I don't think having guns in your house is going to be much good against the tanks and rockets of an invading army. Unless you're suggesting every household should own a tank, a fighter jet and various armoured rockets in case of such an eventuality.

• tundish45 | Jul 23, 2012, 10:29 AM EDT

  Well, there you have it from sunspotter5. The only thing standing between the End Of Civilization As We Know It is a hand gun in every hand. The collateral damage and death to thousands of innocent lives is nothing compared to that big picture. The final crusher proof and end of discussion.

• sunspotter5 | Jul 23, 2012, 09:15 AM EDT

  How did not having guns to use against England work out for Ireland? How did having guns to use against England work out for the United States? Also, Hitler showed himself (and rest assured the next Hitler is in utero or in grade school) to be rather open to friendly negotiation and harmonious living? Right?

• tundish45 | Jul 22, 2012, 07:41 PM EDT

  Scroll down through this thread and note the tone of many of the pro gun postings. They tend towards an intent to use. Which is to be expected recalling the universal truth "To a kid with a hammer, everything looks like a nail."

• seanomelb | Jul 22, 2012, 07:17 PM EDT

  I agree with Belphagor carrying guns = a society in stress. Americans have a siege mentality brought about by successive governments and the NRA promoting fear and loathing of others and sadly it is now ingrained in millions of Americans.

• Curitiba | Jul 22, 2012, 04:22 PM EDT

  I can never understand this American obsession with guns. I read a story in the Daily Mail today about a guy in Florida who answered the door in the middle of the night to a stranger, pointing a gun at him (presumably as a precaution). The stranger turned out to be a copper who shot him dead. Had he not had a gun, he would presumably be still alive. Even the muggers here in the UK don't have guns. So if you have a gun, the mugger is going to have one as well, and it turns a situation where you just hand over your money into one where someone gets shot. I can't see the point of all this.

• Belphagor | Jul 22, 2012, 03:26 PM EDT

  If life was so bad that you have to carry a gun to get a jug of milk from the fridge, surely society hs failed. Guns kill, they aren't used for anything else only killing. Even when a Policeman uses his gun in service he risks the possibility of being jailed for not following protocol or even killed by the shooter. A complete ban on all guns is what is needed. I have been able to protect my family for many years without needing a gun.

• GordonHide | Jul 22, 2012, 03:21 PM EDT

  Many posters assume that changing the law will have the dramatic effect of lowering the murder rate to something like the European average. I fear that the situation will be rather like prohibition. Prohibition created organised crime in the US just as the second amendment has created very widespread gun ownership and a very high murder rate. Repealing prohibition never reduced organised crime and I don't suppose repealing the second amendment will reduce the murder rate. It will just render those without guns, (the law abiding), much more vulnerable. A pistol is not called an equaliser for nothing.

• lokionline | Jul 22, 2012, 02:22 PM EDT

  Tell me again why it is important for citizens to be armed with fully automatic assault weapons with large magazines?
  
  I just can't see how any society other than a failed state would be willing to countenance this.

• peterson | Jul 22, 2012, 01:59 PM EDT

  If they outlaw guns, outlaws will still have guns !!!

• danders1 | Jul 22, 2012, 01:44 PM EDT

  Britains Pop. is about 1/7 of the US so that comparrison of numbers is no good.

• kevinhayes | Jul 22, 2012, 12:56 PM EDT

  @ shop tom - ah, the sad old "leave it or love it", mainly right wing and intellectually bankrupt, defense. Me, I prefer to "form a more perfect union". Look it up, dude, it's in the Preamble to the Constitution. Repeal the Second Amendment!

• hermitTalker | Jul 22, 2012, 11:20 AM EDT

  I have never understood why the Second Amendment has been raised to a sacred cow status- it was designed to counter the Brits. refusal to allow guns in the Colonies out of fear or rebellion- today it has become an excuse for the irrational NRA to allow police-protective clothing to be penetrated by certain ammo. and to allow Elephant guns in urban areas

• pickateer | Jul 22, 2012, 11:06 AM EDT

  It's not a matter of facing down the gun lobby. Its enforcing the existing laws that are a problem. Criminals don't apply for permits, Chicago, Detroit, New York, LA are perfect examples of what is happening with criminals and guns. Further, to take away the right to own a gun, and carry it as a concealed weapon from law abiding citizens would find the US becoming as bad a Mexico where the cartels murder at will using guns Eric Holder's DOJ allowed to walk into Mexico in an effort to disparage our 2nd Amendment rights.

• cookecountytex | Jul 22, 2012, 10:04 AM EDT

  One other thing, I have a ar15 , a shotgun and a40 cal. all go with me on my job , I work in the oil and gas industry, I have been in areas of Texas along the border where we have alot of trouble with drug-mules and those who bring people from other countries so I take care of myself , some counties may be bigger than some states in the east , but full of honest people who scrape out a living. Others are not good and there to make a buck selling the drugs or women that they mule to people here who are in that kind of thing. yep its a bad place and cities like,LA NYC,Shii-cago purchase the goods that fuel this and our fed does not have the man power or want to to fix it. Guns protect and kill, true its the person the gun that makes the difference. I was checked out by the DPS-local and state to carry a weapon in Texas and never had to draw leather yet, but can.

• cookecountytex | Jul 22, 2012, 09:46 AM EDT

  Mr Roberts , is from one of those places where gun control is to keep the people from carrying a weapon, He is one of those who choose not to protect his family or himself, He trusts the people who he elected to protect him, So in Colorado who had a gun, the murder had the gun, was the only one and it cost alot of lives and hurt many more. I carry even to get a jug of milk. Its for everyones protection , as I am a honest man who would put on the line for right.In my humble opinion we should have hung the guy who did this from the nearest tree and been done with him,the hurt would be there but butthead would not be able to play this out in a court room and get his jollies off again and again. In colorado 100 years ago he would be swinging right now. Its not about guns with this guy its the mother may i deal , where mommy said its ok,bum berg in a city where he has crime out his ass , the only thing he can stop is the big gulp , sad man who should just open a building sometime but has not a clue of what the people in his city bear with the crime that goes on in a city the size of my dfw airport. I plan to drink a 64oz soda today and later think about NYc as my thoughts leave me. I think if I was a New Yorker I would vote for someone else in the future. son of a gun

• borefield | Jul 22, 2012, 08:30 AM EDT

  How typical of the left wing liberals to turn this tragedy into a political control issue. Will Patrick and Bloomberg be able to control teargas, liquids concoctions that disturbed individuals spend months perfecting and I guess they think they can control what goes on in disturbed minds. Bloomberg and liberals may work on banning salt, calories, sugar and Happy Hour! They lack common sense with these ridiculous ideas. Guns don't kill on their own, disturbed and evil people kill, sometimes with guns, sometimes with knives and a multitude of other ways.

• Baggie68 | Jul 22, 2012, 06:21 AM EDT

  None of these spree killers use an un-licensed gun(s). They are all legally held firearms. Do the math!

• Kevin Longan | Jul 22, 2012, 12:57 AM EDT

  Hey, we Americans need guns in order to curb population growth, protect ourselves from psychos and kill animals at will! Seriously, this problem will be an incessant one; ban guns and the black market will take over regardless. I'm not sure what will solve this problem but I'm tired of these tragedies and am wondering "Where next?".

• seanomelb | Jul 22, 2012, 12:09 AM EDT

  That's right mike7571!! let's have a shoot out in the theatre and more innocent loss of life.Your concept of freedom is a siege mentality where everyone is a Wyatt Earp and the gun is God. why does the US have the highest civilian gun deaths per annum in the world and the highest incarceration rates in the world. If thats your take on freedom God help you and God help America.

• gregwb57 | Jul 21, 2012, 10:16 PM EDT

  Ok, Ill give up my guns on one condition, anybody that commits a crime with a gun, no matter how petty it is gets the death penality, no appeals, no nothing!

• Mike7571 | Jul 21, 2012, 08:20 PM EDT

  The liberals answer is always more gun control. Tell me will you, what did that sick man do that was legal? If one person was in the audience had a gun they could have stopped him immediately. And to dare compare us to British subjects? We have certain freedoms in this country and it is because of the right to keep and bear arms that we do have those rights.

• GregShox | Jul 21, 2012, 08:08 PM EDT

  Only in America would the word Liberal be an insult. Why is wrong to support tolerance, freedom of religion, freedom of speech and protection of the vulnerable? If that's what makes Liberalism evil, then I suppose I must be evil too.

• seanomelb | Jul 21, 2012, 07:53 PM EDT

  The computer glitch on my post should read from 1965 -1975 80,000 Americans died from gunfire(plus 50,000 in Vietnam)

• Belphagor | Jul 21, 2012, 07:40 PM EDT

  Why do American's need so many guns? I appreciate that it is written into the constitution but the world is a different place than it was in 1791. I can understand the Military requiring guns and maybe even farmers but surely there are other aternatives to lethal firearms that people can use to fulfill their Rambo ...desires?

• Phaenius | Jul 21, 2012, 07:32 PM EDT

  Irish and Proud, I submitted a comment earlier, which did not pass the censurs because of its honesty, or some REALLY bad technical reason making it difficult to post here, that the theater had a sign "No Firearms allowed" or something to that manner, at every ticket booth...though in a way difficult to read some say.

• seanomelb | Jul 21, 2012, 07:21 PM EDT

  The last mass killing in Australia was 1996 and in that year the ownership of semi-automatic weapons was banned with (a few exceptions) The USA has 15 times the population of Australia and 100 times the deaths buy gunfire. From 1965-1975 80,000 Americans died from gunfire(plus 50,000 in Vietnam). The major problem appears to be a siege mentality and a blaise attitude toward human life.It,s about time the USA joined the rest of the free world in gun control. The N.R.A. is a corporation which pays its executive six figure salaries and they will say anything to protect their lifestyle.

• ProudCanadian | Jul 21, 2012, 07:05 PM EDT

  Deltoid71 yes we have had one or two of these sensceless acts but how many have you had 50 or 60 and don't give me the crap of population cause it isn't going anywhere. You are assuming China is doing that because they are afraid there people will rise up, that is stupid, dictatorship or not that isn't the reason and again you are creating a fantasy to condon the right to kill. I see nothing wrong if I want to get a gun with waiting a couple of years so that they can check and double check my credentials(not that I have anything to hide) that gives the authorities the opportunity to know that I am ok, that is all I'm saying. You are right though unfortunatly I suppose if some one wants to get a gun there is always the black market and that is a big problem. That is where these people got the guns that did the shooting in Toronto. I can guarantee they didn't buy them at the store.

• IrishAndProud | Jul 21, 2012, 07:00 PM EDT

  Correction: Colorado allows concealed weapons, but requires a permit for it. And if anyone in that theatre had bothered to do that, perhaps more (if not all) of the dead -- save for the gunman -- would be alive, now.

• IrishAndProud | Jul 21, 2012, 06:53 PM EDT

  Ah, yes...the big, bad 'gun lobby.' Yes, it was the gun lobby that made this nut walk into that theatre, pull the triggers and kill all those people. I guess the 'knife lobby' is responsible for every stabbing, and the 'baseball lobby' is responsible for every crime committed with a bat. Patrick, you're (as usual) A) taking immediate advatage of dead people -- practically before they're even cold (and like with Katrina probably happy they're dead, too) -- to promote more of your unconsitutional gun control, and B) being as predictable as stout in a pub, in the process. If Colorado had allowed a concealed weapons permit, perhaps this freak could have been dropped, before he even got started. It's also nteresting, isn't it, btw...that the cities in the USA with the greatest gun crime also happen to have the most stringent gun restrictions...and that most of those gun crimes are committed by inner-city liberals? Come to think of it most gun crime in the USA is NOT committed by NRA types, at all, but by the aforementioned. Just a thought. But the 'gun lobby' is only as powerful as it is because the people BACK IT...overwhelmingly.

• tundish45 | Jul 21, 2012, 06:23 PM EDT

  Well, thank goodness. Now we've finally reached the level of real debate. Who's ready for a pint? My turn.

• merefalow | Jul 21, 2012, 06:02 PM EDT

  freedom to bear arms,its written into the constitution,also the power of the gun lobby,the massive industry of gun production,how can it be challenged or controlled,to much money in it,this carnage will continue unchecked, psychological profiling security checks on prospective customers, impracticable and it would,nt work anyway, especially as half the yanks who own guns are nutters who love killing animals anyway.a high proportion of people who are cruel to animals go on to kill people.not much hope is there,if they wont bring gun control in after all the presidents they have had murdered they are hardly likely to worry to much about joe public.sickos have little to worry about.

• aloistmartin | Jul 21, 2012, 05:53 PM EDT

  A Loaded AR15 in every pot, is George III worst Nightmare ! Unfortunately, it is also the greatest deterrence to the success of Free Enterprise Capitalism. For when the Plutocratic Elite must come to The People, for not only Permission to conduct Business; But for Consent to Govern ? You incur the basal makings, of Dissent, Revolution, Autonomy, Self Determination, and Independence ! There is only #1. Ireland ! Support the Real I.R.A.

• Phaenius | Jul 21, 2012, 05:44 PM EDT

  Why bother - real good comment does not show

• irishpjk | Jul 21, 2012, 05:28 PM EDT

  wtf Simple solution for Pat is move to Europe. A bit of advice before you go don’t burn your passport when you get there, because sooner or later you will realize that the grass is always greener on the other side. I lived on both sides and to me America with all its guns and other faults is still far ahead.

• tundish45 | Jul 21, 2012, 05:01 PM EDT

  @Ajreaper ... little emotional there? You packin?

• NYCsheridan | Jul 21, 2012, 04:56 PM EDT

  While I want assault weapons highly regulated, I must say that comparing Britains # of homicides vs the USA is stupid, considering the difference in population.

• Ajreaper | Jul 21, 2012, 04:50 PM EDT

  Tundish45 an impossible extreme? It's an absolute 100% fact that cannot be argued and in no way shape or form is a fake counter argument. Folks like you don't like it for just that reason- better to argue the emotions then the facts because that's all you have to stand on. How is a gun uncontrolled? Make then illegal to obtain or posses? How has that tactic worked with say "controlled" substances like narcotics and illegal drugs? Got them off the streets and shut down all drug related crime and violence has it? There is nothing to debate or argue other then- why is it mental midgets like yourself don't get nothing has ever been controlled or eliminated by making it illegal. Oh and there are a massive number of drivers every evening out operating their cars under the influence of alcohol and they will kill and injury many thousands more each year then the nut jobs with a gun ever will. Only difference is you like cars and dislike guns so battle the lesser evil because it's the one YOU have an issue with not the one that impacts society the greatest.

• Irishboy1952 | Jul 21, 2012, 04:25 PM EDT

  tundish45; As a Retired LEO & Vet, if I, for one, would have been there, you would have heard three shots, his first and my two... Sorry, double tap... No Muss, No fuss, save the tax payers a lot of $... If you don't like this Country, feel free to leave. The framers wrote the Constitution, way before your scramble brain arrived. If you like, ask the people of China, Germany etc...

• tundish45 | Jul 21, 2012, 04:19 PM EDT

  @ Ajreaper Setting up an impossible extreme as a fake counter argument is a very weak debating tactic. How about addressing the fact that there are a massive number of uncontrolled guns in the US.

• Ajreaper | Jul 21, 2012, 03:59 PM EDT

  Never fails when something terrible like this happens so many use this as an excuse to want to take guns away from all the people who did not do something terrible. How about this- let's take away all the cars and alcohol from all those who have never driven drunk and killed or injured anyone. Alcohol and driving kills far more people every year then nut jobs with a gun ever have.

• Deltoid71 | Jul 21, 2012, 02:44 PM EDT

  Proud Canadian.......why do you suppose China imposed those laws?? To reduce crime? I doubt it, considering it's a Communist dictatorship, it's probably so the populace couldn't rise up against the government. I mentioned the population because those numbers can skew the statistics. And you still haven't addressed your own shooting problem at the mall in Toronto. It should be obvious to everyone that gun controls don't work......look at the large metro areas in the U.S. and their gun laws. How are their crime rates? Pretty high, huh? Is there a correlation, there? Could be. BTW, tundish45, that particular theater was a "no gun" zone, so I doubt if anyone was carrying. Just so you happen to remember your own advice..... "don't dismiss an alternative opinion as stupid and uninformed just because you don't agree with it. So you suppose that the Crips and Bloods care about the gun laws or get their's legally? If anything, they're probably FOR gun control because it only affects the legal gun owner, anyway.....THEY certainly aren't. Nice try, tho, at trying to equate two criminal gangs and make them look like part of "polite" society.

• tundish45 | Jul 21, 2012, 02:32 PM EDT

  @shop tom, instead of throwing down the crusher news about gun training --- which is usually the first fact asserted by hand gun advocate defenders --- try dealing with this. In big cities ganges are fully armed. Crips know Bloods are packin. So, if an armed society is a polite society, whay are they still so quick at blasting at each other? Is the only thing missing the lack of trainig?

• tundish45 | Jul 21, 2012, 02:01 PM EDT

  @shop tom, don't dismiss an alternative opinion as stupid and uninformed just because you don't agree with it.

• durtymurphy | Jul 21, 2012, 01:53 PM EDT

  Where does Patrick roberts live? In a gated community or "safe" neighborhood? I live in the country where I want and need my guns. Unfortunatly Americans use broadstroke swaths when slobbering about laws and controls, what works for Washington D.C. does not necessarily work for Washington State. Good reasons why a confederacy works better, each state knows what they need, Some dude in D.C. wants a law for farmers,across the board, but a farmer in Texas has different requirements than a farmer in Oregon, for example. So the author should think what he is talking about. Better to be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. Eh, Mr. Roberts?

• shop tom | Jul 21, 2012, 01:53 PM EDT

  tundish45, one of the things you learn when getting a permit for concealed carry (yes, you must attend classes for that) is that you learn not to pull your weapon when you are out-gunned or are in a position to harm innocents if you shoot. You really shouldn't comment on things you know nothing about. Personally, I do carry a weapon for 2 reasons. 1) A cop is too heavy to carry around. 2) When seconds count, cops are minutes or more away.

• tundish45 | Jul 21, 2012, 01:52 PM EDT

  'course, my earlier post might be proved wrong when all the forensics come in. Maybe it will turn out there were some shots fired by wannabe vigilantes. If so, not effectively.

• ProudCanadian | Jul 21, 2012, 01:51 PM EDT

  Deltoid71 grasping at sttaws are we. What has population have to do with anything. When was the last time you heard of a Canadian child finding a revolver or M16 under a bed or in a drawer and shooting him/her self with it. If your mind wasn't so clouded you would have read that I am not against guns but more for gun control. If these idiots couldn't get guns anywhere and at anytime through the way China and yes the way Canada regulates permits that I feel would eliminate a lot of the senseless acts that have gone on. We in Canada have to also learn from the Chineese to not allow just anyone to be in possesion of firearms, but we are much more regulated than you are in the States and that my friend is a fact.

• tundish45 | Jul 21, 2012, 01:48 PM EDT

  Notice how many hand gun advocates talk about protection? In a place where at least several people were probably legally armed, nobody jumped up and shot the wacko. They all ran the other way. Well, at least we didn't have one or more of those wannabe vigilantes shooting each other or additional innocents in the confusion.

• OrenTruitt | Jul 21, 2012, 01:22 PM EDT

  More people are killed in the US each year by drunk drivers than by firearms. Let's ban alcohol! Wait! Didn't the goverment try that? Britain banned handguns yet there is MORE crime committed with handguns today than before the ban. Banning firearms will only guarantee that criminals have unarmed targets.

• GregShox | Jul 21, 2012, 01:20 PM EDT

  Why stop with M16s? Give the people bazookas.

• Deltoid71 | Jul 21, 2012, 01:09 PM EDT

  Proud Canadian.....taking everything into account, I'd just as soon stay were I am rather than live in China. And how about your own country? I understand there was a mass shooting incident in Toronto a couple of weeks ago......how are those gun laws working out for you? kevinhayes......apparently, even those strict laws couldn't keep ABB from killing those people. Perhaps part of the reason that the stats are lower is that the population is less, too.

• shop tom | Jul 21, 2012, 01:04 PM EDT

  Kevinhayes, if you are unhappy in a country that recognizes it's citizen's rights to self-defense against criminals and tyranny, I invite you to leave and make a home in a country you deem favorable to your line of thought. As for me, I know that there is no law that would have stopped or impeded Holmes in his evil act.

• kevinhayes | Jul 21, 2012, 12:48 PM EDT

  Freebie28 - please, get your facts right. ABB was a bad guy but he was an outlier (and he killed 77, not 90. Ever heard of the Internet?). Norway has a much lower death by firearms rate than the USA, thanks to their strict gun laws. And your solution is to have guns in a darkened cinema? Might have got the death count up to 77, even 90. God help us. Repeal the Second Amendment.

• shop tom | Jul 21, 2012, 12:45 PM EDT

  As a member of the "gun lobby", I know that your characterization of us is based on ignorance and prejudice. Over 64 million gun owners in the US haven't killed anybody and many, many crimes are deterred by lawful gun use by private citizens. Then there is that pesky 2nd Amendment that the founding fathers realized as being a necessary and proper right. Those that call for stricter gun control or outright gun bans are totally ignorant to fact that those who commit heinous crimes as the one in Aurora or just the general criminal DON'T OBEY LAWS, GUN-RELATED OR OTHERWISE!

• Irishboy1952 | Jul 21, 2012, 12:36 PM EDT

  Yea, lets take all the guns away from the people and then you'll have 1930 Germany, and we all know what happen then, Don't We!!! Millions of people were slaughter by the Government. We, The People; in the USA have the right to bear arms. If you don't like the Constitution, pack your bags and get out. No one is keeping you here. I fought for my right to own a gun. Did you??? The idiot that used the guns in Colorado had no permits. He obtained them illegally. More people die by MVA's in a year, over 13,000 more then by guns. Let's take all the cars off of the streets for that matter, Idiot. You Liberals, you make me sick. Yes, he was a well educated man, like you, with a PHD, and went out killing people because he is sick in the head and wanted to be someone. Hunters - Hunt, Killers- Kill. I say, take all the Cars off of the roads... The next time you or your family are a victims of a crime, call a Liberal... Good Luck, I keep my guns and deal with the problem.

• Nicomax | Jul 21, 2012, 12:36 PM EDT

  There is essentially nothing wrong with a so-called "liberal agenda", especially if it contains some common sense about our need to regulate life-destroying weapons. Should we also be allowed to have flame throwers, if not personal drones? Of the almost 9,000 deaths by guns each year, a very tiny % result from someone defending their life or property.

• ProudCanadian | Jul 21, 2012, 12:10 PM EDT

  Brian0 I don't normally agree with you but I have to agree with you on this. The Americans won't be happy until they own everyone let alone elect dictators for there own country. Freebie28 that is like saying if one of those persons in the theatre had a gun those twelve wouldn't have died what a stupid statement. Make it tougher for people to get there hands on guns and you have solved the problem. In China it takes up to 2 and some times three years to get a gun permit. The problem in the states people can get a gun practically anywhere and anytime. Right to bare arms should read right to kill.

• seanaci | Jul 21, 2012, 11:43 AM EDT

  Its not as if this was a departure from default behavior for either Obama or Romney. The gun lobby is only one of many, many special interests that BAPF (bought-and-paid-for) politicians bow low to. And they know they will be supported by enough of the trained lemmings amongst us who rush to their defense time and time again. Just read the responses in this thread.

• biggles008 | Jul 21, 2012, 11:35 AM EDT

  In the USA, guns from the cradle to the grave.

• Cedric123 | Jul 21, 2012, 11:23 AM EDT

  If weapons are the problem then why is it that the areas of the U.S. with the highest legal ownership of firearms also have the lowest levels of violent crime. As for the 2010 deaths by firearms, this figure includes accidents, self defense and police use of deadly force as well as homicides. And if Britain is so safe why are there more armed police now than ever in its history, especially after all the weapons bans. As for some of the comments made earlier the wild west was never that wild, in fact you were far safer in the old west than in most modern large cities.

• whiteycat | Jul 21, 2012, 11:11 AM EDT

  I forgot to mention that Bloomberg has his own agenda and its a liberal one.As is this posting area.

• hooligan6a | Jul 21, 2012, 11:10 AM EDT

  There are places in Africa where guns were not not so available so people used machetes to kill a few million. I bet some of the dead wish they had the right to bear arms.

• whiteycat | Jul 21, 2012, 11:01 AM EDT

  It does not matter how strict the gun laws are there will forever be sickos out there.What is needed is to find a way to keep outlaws from being able to out gun us and the police.Strict laws will not keep outlaws from getting high powered guns tear gas or what ever they need to kill nor will it deter deranged individuals,.More mental healthcare is needed just as bad as regular healthcare. I dont recall mental health being listed in obamacare.

• bogsidebunny | Jul 21, 2012, 10:52 AM EDT

  Why should either go after gun ownership? Instead lock up the criminal and or insane people who use the guns illegally. While on the subject of banning instruments of death, how about the bigger killer than guns..."The motor vehicles". Between crashes and pollution they take out more people.

• patrickesq | Jul 21, 2012, 10:51 AM EDT

  Guns are the last refuge of cowards, who are most prone to attack anyone who would dare to propose some reasonable limitation on the access and magnitude of these implements of death. There seems to be little , or no, rational justification for the sale of assault rifles, unless you belong to a drug cartel. Anyone who is allowed to own a gun should be licensed to prove their competence to use it . limitations on their use

• BrianO | Jul 21, 2012, 10:47 AM EDT

  To much decent happening repeal the first amendment, why not just get to the end game and have the united States become a dictatorship, you will all be safe from each other then.

• Sparklet | Jul 21, 2012, 10:44 AM EDT

  Dev4, care to elaborate? What rights do you have in the US, that UK citizens don't? Oh yeah, the right to buy guns as easily as you can buy doughnuts. Definitely missing out on that one in UK and Ireland.

• handsome68 | Jul 21, 2012, 10:38 AM EDT

  With all due respect to Carrickcourt, I think I noticed a possible misprint in her/his Comment, with which I otherwise agreed. S/he had said " It has nothing to do with the "right to bare arms" it has to do with the "right" to make a lots of money off selling arms. " Carrickcourt, I think you meant "bear" arms and not "bare" arms. If you did indeed mean what you wrote, I concur that some bare arms should definitely just not be seen, period.

• Deltoid71 | Jul 21, 2012, 10:35 AM EDT

  The author conveniently forgets the mass killings in Norway when he says no violence happens in Europe. Two weeks ago, there was a mass shooting at a mall in Toronto........Canada has stricter gun laws than we do. How's that working for them? New York, D.C. and Chicago have three of the strictest gun laws in the country and where is THEIR crime rate? The point is that stricter gun laws don't help. The criminals don't get their guns, legally, anyway. Why not get to the root problem.....do something about the mental health problem in this country. You can start with Bloomberg, who is clearly deranged. Using your logic, the next thing you'll want to get rid of is cars, because obviously all the fatal auto accidents in this country are caused by driverless cars. Never mind the people that text or talk on their phones when they drive or those that drink until their socks are wet and then go out and drive. WHEN will people take responsibility for their own actions instead of blaming guns, cars, etc. for what happens?

• dev4 | Jul 21, 2012, 10:20 AM EDT

  you really want to turn the u s in to england? they english are subjects not citizens have no rights. want to ban something how about cars they killed 42,000 americans last year.

• susan724 | Jul 21, 2012, 10:18 AM EDT

  kevinhayes BRAVO!!

• freebie28 | Jul 21, 2012, 10:18 AM EDT

  Patrick, with all due respect, some of your comments are naive and downright immature; "In Europe and other places where guns are not so freely available no such violence occurs." In a few short days, the world will sadly be reminded of that horrible slaughter of 90 innocents in Norway by Anders Breivik, a lunatic lone gunman. Incidentally, Norway has passed some of the toughest known gun laws. One gun in the hands of a madman killed 90 , whereas one gun in the hands of one of those destined for death, could have saved those same unlucky victims.

• jamthecat | Jul 21, 2012, 10:12 AM EDT

  These thoughts are all well and good, but the time for gun control was 30 years ago. It's too late, now. You'll never get all the guns off the street...hell, you won't even get 10% of them gone. There are too many people who have too many guns and are too far gone into the NRA's evil justifications for protecting the right of anybody to buy assault rifles and cop-killer bullets. There are no politicians with any weight who will stand up to the NRA and their fanatics, who will blame this catastrophe on anybody but themselves. It's just plain too late. We're back to the wild-wild-west, where rules were made at the end of a gun. So much for having a civilized society.

• Porickseantuny | Jul 21, 2012, 10:06 AM EDT

  hand guns are illegal in Chicago the present murder capital of the U.S. If someone in the Aurora Co. theatre had been armed there might not be so many dead

• JimmieM | Jul 21, 2012, 10:05 AM EDT

  We need far stricter gun laws to ensure that innocent people are kept safe.".....Really?....On This Planet? Where have you been?....Have you ever read one word of history?....You have to be wholly ignorant to propose such a thing....Innocent people safe.....Really!!!

• like2tweet | Jul 21, 2012, 10:01 AM EDT

  guns kill people --hello! free acces to guns kill a lot of people --NRA go away

• kevinhayes | Jul 21, 2012, 10:00 AM EDT

  mackazoo - you're quite the comedian. Mike Bloomberg is an Independent, not a Republican, so stop admonishing Patrick to "get his facts right". And lose the "commie" cliches - who are you, Joe McCarthy or Allen West? Or perhaps Michele Bachmann in drag? Or maybe you're Wayne LaPierre? I tune out every waffling politician offering sympathy who refuses to speak out against the ludicrous gun laws in America. That includes most Democrats, cowed by the loathsome NRA. Repeal the Second Amendment!

• mackazoo | Jul 21, 2012, 09:37 AM EDT

  Bloomberg is a disgrace to the Republican party and a better-red-than-dead commie - Oh and so are you Patrick, but you already know that! Oh, and get your facts straight, moron.

• donal1951 | Jul 21, 2012, 09:36 AM EDT

  To restrict people involved in the shooting sports to one firearm would not work. A person carrying a gun for personal protection would either carry a revolver or a semi-automatic pistol such as the Glocks and 1911s that our military and our police use. Those who hunt deer will use a shotgun or a rifle. That's two weapons there. Even some of the most ardent supporters of gun control said there is little that can be legislated to stop a determined mass murderer, especially one with a clean criminal record. It should be noted that the suspect in Colorado, Holmes, bought his firarms from reputable gun stores and passed FBI background checks each time. There was no "gun show loophole" involved. He also bought his firearms over a period of time, so a limit on monthly purchases again would not have stopped him, assuming he is declared fit to stand trial.

• carrickcourt | Jul 21, 2012, 09:31 AM EDT

  It has nothing to do with the "right to bare arms" it has to do with the "right" to make a lots of money off selling arms.