This isn’t an easy post to write.
At all.
Everyone has differing opinions on Gun Control. Everyone has their opinion about why the Aurora shootings went down. I’m not here to try to sway anyone or even to say my opinion on these issues is right. I just want to talk about it a little bit, mostly because I think a little bit better when I write things out.
Okay.
Deep breath.
Go.
James Holmes walked into a midnight showing of The Dark Knight Rises after purchasing a ticket at Century 16 theater in Aurora, Colo. He then went out an emergency exit, propped the door open, got his weapons, and re-entered the theater. After throwing two canisters of some kind of smoke emitting substance, he began to fire into the crowd. He would go on to kill at least 12 people and wound 58.
It’s significant to point out that most of those wounded were hit by bullets, while only some were injured while escaping through the chaos.
This tragic event has a lot of people talking about things like whether the guy was crazy (I don’t think he was), and whether this will finally lead to guns being banned (I don’t think so).
But, I’ve also heard things like, “If I had been there with my concealed gun, I would’ve been able to stop the guy.”
Right. You would’ve been able to stop the guy who surprised you with explosives and was already shooting an automatic weapon at you while people are screaming, the lighting is dim, smoke is everywhere, the movie is still playing loudly, your adrenaline is up, etc. etc. etc. You’re gonna be able to pop the guy in the gas mask with all that going on? And did you take into consideration that he was wearing body armor?
Give me a break, Internet Tough Guy.
I’ve also seen people advocating that we should take guns away.
That’s not going to work, either.
Let’s face it, if I want narcotics, I can get them. If I want pirated movies or music, I can get them. People get stuff that is illegal all the time. Guns would be no different.
Honestly, in this type of situation, the best thing probably happened. The shooter stopped shooting and gave himself up to police. He didn’t stalk the theater, making sure that everyone was put down. He didn’t go into any other theaters. He didn’t get into a gun fight with police.
Not that these facts negate the tragedy. People died.
John Donne once said,
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were: any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.
It’s tragic that people were murdered or hurt during a piece of entertainment. It’s sad that people are afraid to go to movies because of the possibility of copycat killers.
What a strange time we are living in.
I wrote earlier that I didn’t think Holmes was or is crazy. I think the amount of planning he put in proves that. He booby-trapped his apartment with explosives, and he had loud music playing when the shooting was going on… so people would think he was home.
And most telling is that he isn’t talking to police. He immediately “lawyered up.”
Maybe we need to start realizing that (in the words of Alfred from The Dark Knight), “Some men just want to watch the world burn.”
I’m interested to see if Holmes gives any reasons for what he did. He appeared in court while I was writing this, and he looked… medicated. Passive. Like he wasn’t actually there. I have to wonder if it’s a tactic or if the guy is really off his rocker.
So, what do you think? Is he evil? Is he crazy? Are guns the real villain? Are guns the real heroes?
Let me know.
Crazy? Evil? Something else?
I’d agree that he’s not off his rocker like we’ll begin to hear.
One thought I had though was that he probably didn’t have the music on to make people think he was home. That would be a weak alibi. I’d imagine he had it on at full volume to make someone (possibly the landlord or a neighbor) open the apartment and set off the traps.
Either way, I hope this trial is a quick one so we don’t have to hear of him for too long.
As you say, if guns were illegal, guys like this could get them anyway with enough motivation. The black market for firearms in countries such as Britain, for example, is thriving and showing no signs of letting up.
To me, it always comes down to accountability in these situations. It’s easy to point your finger at the guns and blame them, because there is nothing human about them, no way in which we can see ourselves reflected in our scapegoat, and that makes people comfortable.
In reality, we don’t want to assign all of the blame to the person who committed the crime, especially if they are not crazy, or if “evil” is too pure and simple a term to explain what they did, as is often the case. This is because, again IMHO, we don’t want to believe or admit that we could possibly have anything in common with the sort of person who could do this.
I can’t call the guy evil. He might have saved a cat once at risk to himself, or helped old ladies cross the street, or given his mom a hug when she needed it, or who knows what. There is undoubtedly “good” in him, just as there is undoubtedly “bad,” just like with all the rest of us. It’s a matter of the choices people make, and why.
I think until his motive is clearer and we know more about him and the situation, I’m going to refrain from putting him in any sort of box that makes it easier for me to understand and accept what happened. I think I just won’t do that anyway, because the world doesn’t feed us the lessons we need to learn in life in convenient little gift-wrapped packages, so we shouldn’t pretend that it does.
at the risk of sounding like one of “those” kinds of people, I’d suggest that one possibility is demonic influence…there’s lots of possibilities, though. “Crazy” is not a very specific word– mental illnesses don’t make people “crazy” automatically. Perhaps some odd mixture of meds?
I don’t believe that guns can be evil or a hero. A gun is an object that in the wrong hands can cause harm, and when used correctly can be a useful tool. As for this guy who thought shooting up a theater was a good idea, I don’t think he is crazy, but I can only wish I knew what possesed someone to perform such a harmful act.
He wanted Batman to show up.
Actually, neither. Guns are amoral. They are simply a tool that can be used for good or bad.
I believe there were at least 3 or 4 active service members in the theater. Imagine if they were required to be armed like off duty police officers. That’s four weapons trained service members pointing four guns at his one. We obviously don’t know how difficult it would be to fight back in the chaos, but humans want to survive and having the tools to fight back may have made a difference. Police were there fast but not fast enough. Who was there? Civilians and military. The biggest lesson to learn is to realize that we do not live in a safe world. Bad people are going to do bad things no matter what the laws. It up to us to be serious about the unsafe world we live in, not to be paranoid but to be alert and never say: “That wouldn’t happen to me!”. Get a gun and take a class!
Sup TJ. I just wanted to say that an armed person in the audience would likely have the time and space to produce his/her weapon and attempt to line up a shot on the assailant.
Granted, the place had to be enveloped in pure chaos, but I do imagine the shooter would be trying to shoot at people trying to run, not at a stationary target in the audience who would undoubtedly be using a theater seat as concealment. Ideally, the armed civilian would be halfway up the seating chart – far enough up to use high ground as an advantage but not too far away to make it a difficult shot with a pistol.
At the very least, someone firing back at him would have diverted his attention, allowing more people to escape. Body armor or not, you CANNOT expect someone to get shot or shot at and not react. Just my thoughts. I love the Cool Ship
Overall it is just a sad situation. The guy intended to cause harm and create as much chaos as he could. That is all that seems to be evident at this time.
No. I do not believe the weapon is the issue here, it is the person who used that weapon.
As for the Internet tough guys you speak to, truth is that just one person with proper training and armed could very well have limited the amount of casualties in this situation. There would most likely still have been fatalities and injuries, just less of them.
These types of shootings are nothing new. I remember back in the 80′s when we had the Mc Donald’s shootings.
The question here is what led this young man to become capable of this. Then what we can do to spot these circumstances that led him there and then to try to prevent these things from happening to others in the future.