Yesterday’s shooting is bringing up the issue of gun control. This article says we shouldn’t let this massacre deter us from having guns to defend ourselves. The shooter was dressed in protective gear head to foot, so I’m not sure that he could’ve been stopped if someone in the theater had a legally concealed weapon. It’s an interesting idea, but is that really the answer-arming more and more people in public places? Accidents happen all the time with guns. Kids accidentally get shot or shoot other people. My little brother in law told me last night he is strapped in public places but not when he is drinking. How can we trust that people packing guns for self defense will use the same judgement? It seems like a recipe for more disaster to me to put more guns in more people’s hands, especially in public places. Take the movie theater shooting specifically, with tear gas in the air and mass hysteria all around, wouldn’t it have been tough for people to tell who was the bad guy? I can just picture my little brother in there shooting at the bad guy trying to protect himself but accidentally hitting someone trying to run to safety. The more people you have shooting bullets, the higher the chances of innocent people getting hit. It’s math.
What is the answer? First let me say outright that I don’t have the definitive answer. If you asked me, I would say everybody should just love everybody and then we wouldn’t have a need for guns, but I get it; that’s naive and idealistic. But it’s true.
The second amendment gave us the right to bear arms (for self defense, hunting etc.), but should it give us the right to buy automatic and semi-automatic weapons whose sole purpose is to kill many people in a small amount of time? Guns are already regulated somewhat. We can’t go to 7-11 and pick up a rocket launcher or a bushel of grenades. But the question is where is the line drawn? How is it that people like this Colorado shooter and other like him can arm themselves with an arsenal and set out to attack innocent people? I get it that he planned it and pulled the trigger, but he probably would’ve been less effective without that AR-15. He could’ve still killed people with the shotgun and the handgun, but why was he able to secure so many firearms and ammunition legally and without raising any suspicion? Was he planning a major hunting trip where he needed to fire at a herd of hippos or something? Did he need to stockpile all those weapons and ammunition to defend himself against a home invader? Nobody thought twice about why he was buying the goods. He was able to secure all those deadly tools, and look at what happened.
Every time there is a tragedy like this, we tighten up security in hindsight. Airport security has been shaped by the 9/11 attacks as well as the underwear and shoe bomber. What’s next? Do we increase gun control? Do we have metal detectors at movie theaters, grocery stores, schools, and every other public place?
This article says he is acting irrationally in jail and thinks he is acting in a movie. The underlying problem in my opinion is mental illness. What are we as a society going to do about the mentally ill? And how can we keep mentally deranged people from getting guns and other deadly weapons? How do we curb the desire to kill?
These are the people whose lives were cut short. Each person has a story and a family. Each person walked into that theater for fun not knowing what violence would ensue. We don’t think that way when we go out to movies or the mall. We trust that other people will act right and abide by the rules.
We can’t go back and fix it. The shooter also cut short his own life by taking these actions. He will either be killed in jail, put to death, or live the rest of his life in a mental hospital. It’s too bad he didn’t get to a mental hospital sooner. I wonder what went so wrong in his life.
Regardless of where you stand on the gun control debate, I think it’s easy to agree that guns shouldn’t be used for acts of pure evil. I respect your right to have a gun, but do I have the right to be safe?