The Second Amendment of the United States constitution gives citizens the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
But we can't help but wonder if the founding fathers ever envisaged this kind of scenario:
(CBS/AP) AURORA, Colo. - A gunman clad in body armor and wearing a gas mask opened fire on moviegoers at a midnight showing of the latest Batman movie Friday, killing 12 and injuring dozens more in one of the deadliest mass shootings in recent U.S. history.The violent and chaotic scene erupted at about 12:30 a.m. local time as the suspected gunman, identified as 24-year-old James Holmes, stood at the front of one of the Century 16 theaters at the Aurora Mall where "The Dark Knight Rises" was playing. Witnesses reported that the gunman entered the theater through an emergency exit door and authorities said he threw two gas canisters before opening fire."Then it was a blur," Spenser Sherman told "CBS This Morning" said. "Then I heard a couple gunshots.""I thought it was part of the movie, like a fun little prank - that it would be over in a few seconds. It obviously wasn't."She said she only saw a silhouette of the suspect, and that the gunman said nothing."Everybody had dropped to the floor after the first couple gunshots, and then he fired some more. And then after that, there was a pause in the gunshots. Some people say he was reloading, I don't know. But at that point, my boyfriend was like 'This is the time, we need to go, we need to get out of the theater right now.' So we ran."Aurora Police chief Dan Oates said a total of 71 people were shot, including the dead. Of the 59 people wounded, some were critically injured, though Oates couldn't give an exact figure.
13 comments:
Except how many firearm deaths will occur before they revisit the concerning amendment. Since 2005 there have been 11 mass shootings by lone gunmen killing 120 people and inuring more.
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/07/20/aurora-shooting-latest-in-a-long-line-of-u-s-mass-shootings/
While this sounds bad enough, when you include all firearm related deaths the numbers explode. In 2010 alone 8,775 people were killed by guns: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state
Yes ...and spoons made me fat.
bsprout; no people were "killed by guns". They were killed by the people who held the guns, and pulled the triggers.
Moist von Lipwig-the difference in gun laws between New Zealand and the US means that you are 11 times more likely to be shot and killed in the US than here.
Using your logic there should be no controls on the use of dangerous chemicals, drugs or equipment. The onus of responsibility is on the user and it is an impingement on individual rights to restrict the availability of the use of anything.
It is interesting that there are strict controls on what people can take on to a plane in the US because of the potential danger to other passengers but people can walk the streets carrying guns.
There is also a huge difference between the functions of a spoon and a firearm. Getting fat may very well be a side effect of using a spoon but killing and maiming is the main purpose of a firearm. The consequences of the uncontrolled use of firearms is about life or death and there is no turning back after the impulsive pulling of a trigger.
Sorry KS, your comment appeared after I posted mine but I think I addressed yours as well.
I am also really concerned that we may end up arming all our police as this will only increase the potential of even more deaths. Shooting others because of the fear of being shot will apply to both sides and we may end up with even more police dying if they carried firearms than not. There is no logic in saying that we will all be safer if we could carry firearms.
In the US it is legal to carry visible or concealed guns, while in New Zealand it is prohibited to do both. I sure this contributes to the fact it is 11 times safer here, a strong argument in itself.
An interesting site I discovered for comparing data and regulations from different countries.
http://www.gunpolicy.org/
Here's a question for you bsprout; would you rather that the NZ Police were armed with Glocks or Tasers?
The weapon of choice in NZ is the knife.
KS you ask the question as if that was the only choice. While I fully appreciate the dangerous situations police find themselves in and can see where a Taser would indeed be a better alternative than a gun there is still a huge concern about their use. There have been too many incidences already in New Zealand where Tasers have been used inappropriately. When Tasers are readily available it is tempting to use them as the first choice solution.
Again we appear to focus on symptoms not causes, most situations involving violence in NZ involve alcohol and controlling the consumption and supply of this drug would make the biggest difference to the health and safety of our country than anything else.
In NZ, with a very few exceptions, only the bad guys have guns. If one ever does decide to do some damage, the Colorado, or Michigan, or any other US mass shooting, body-counts will look like an auto-accident!
Combine weaponised gang members with methamphetamine and it's only a matter of time.
The answer is not more gun control, but less.
That's right. Everyone needs to carry automatic weapons everywhere. That's such a great idea Gantt! Why oh why weren't more of those people in that movie theatre armed? It's worked wherever it's been tried.
I ust admit to being rather taken aback the first time I went into a pub in South Africa, and there was a sign at the door saying that guns had to be left with the bouncers!
See know, if South Africans were allowed to carry their guns in bars there would be no violence is South Africa. Gantt is so right!
Post a Comment