Colorado Gunman Kills 14, Injures 50 At Batman Movie
July 20, 2012 28 Comments
There is apparently a new Batman movie out. I just learned about it this week because of some comment Limbaugh apparently made. The left says it was a conspiracy theory, the right says Limbaugh exposed a Democrat strategy and we here at Steven Birn Speaks just don’t care. With all the problems facing the country, it seems a theory Limbaugh puts out about a movie is not all that important. In any event, at a midnight showing of the film in Colorado a gunman opened fire killing at least 14 and injuring around 50. (legitimate question of the day: Why is a 6 year old at a midnight movie?) We should all take time to pray for those injured and for the families of those murdered last night.
The suspect is James Holmes, a 24 year old with no prior contact with the police. He apparently showed up 30 minutes into the film dressed in riot gear, set off a smoke bomb and then shot the theater up. Holmes must have issues of some sort because his mother told the press that the cops had the right guy. We should note she lives in San Diego and isn’t part of a conspiracy with her son, presumably she had an idea that he was evil and/or had some sort of mental problem.
No one knows Holmes reason for shooting up a theater during a Batman movie. The film apparently has political connotations but it would be pure speculation to suggest politics played any role in this act of evil. For all we know we’re dealing with a bipolar kid who is off his meds or we’re dealing with someone who is simply evil and hellbent on self destruction. We don’t know what his deal is yet, just like we didn’t know what Jared Laughner’s deal was after he shot Rep. Giffords.
Not surprisingly the gun control crowd is demanding a restriction on our second amendment protections. Nanny Bloomberg wants Romney and Obama to restrict guns. Piers Morgan is apparently on board with gun control as well. This is the same response we get every time there is a mass shooting. Never mind that they have mass shootings throughout Europe on a fairly regular basis despite having strict gun control and in some countries outright bans. Criminals always find a way to get guns, by definition criminals aren’t much interested in following the law. Thus gun possession is just another in a long line of criminal disrespect of the law in places with strict gun control.
In fact, this mornings shootings provide an argument for gun possession. If one one of the movie patrons had a gun on him, he could have shot Holmes dead and saved lives. If Colorado had lots of people carrying weapons, would Holmes have still gone to the theater last night? It’s very easy for a criminal to take advantage when they know no one can protect themselves. When they fear people will use force, criminals tend not to engage in criminal acts. Would that fear have stopped James Holmes? We’ll never know that but we do know that when conceal carry laws are enacted crime rates drop.
We should not try to turn this tragedy into a political issue nor should we try to score cheap political points on the tragedy. We should pray for those injured, especially those fighting for their lives in hospital today. We should pray for the families of those who are dead. We should also not forget to pray for James Holmes, that God would call him to repent of this wicked act and turn to Christ for forgiveness. We should not turn this into a big battle for gun control, nor should we try to make this into some sort of political issue because of the content of the Batman movie. There are evil people in the world, Holmes is one of them. Sometimes they simply act.
Update 1: While ABC News speculates that Holmes might be a member of the Tea Party (because of course all gunmen must be conservatives) word comes out that a 1986 Batman comic had the exact same storyline as this morning’s shooting. Perhaps Holmes was a deranged, evil person who copied a scene from a comic book.
Update 2: Since this post was written it has been determined that so far 12 people have died and 58 have been injured. It sounds like some of those injured may be in very critical condition so make sure to keep them in your prayers.
About Steven
Nice set-up. You save the real intent of the post for the end. Nobody’s going after your guns, but that fact won’t stop you guys from railing against the Liberal Devil.
When within hours of this outrageous shooting we have one liberal after another demanding more gun control, it’s worthy of comment. That seems to be the first response these people have every time something like this happens in the US. Yet it happens in gun controlled Europe and Canada. It happened in Norway last year, it’s happened in Scotland and France. So while the liberal media is flying off the handle demanding gun control (and blaming the Tea Party like Stephanopolous) it’s important to have a little perspective on the subject.
Obama set to have the UN Gun Ban treaty signed and this will be used for that reason. When in reality had an armed citizen been there carrying; then this guy could have been put down before he killed anyone. I am a great shot and would have hit him in the throat. This is why people should be armed. Crazies would think twice knowing that people would be prepared to match their threat.
No doubt Obama will try to use this shooting for political gain. The one thing you can say is that the Constitution requires a 2/3 majority in the Senate to ratify a treaty. Obama can sign whatever he wants, there are at least 34 Senators who will vote no.
Batman shooter James Holmes is a registered Democrat
http://trenchpress.com/?p=15833
So does that mean Democrats should not have guns?
George Stephanopoulos lied to say he was a tea party person.
What they also do not say it that it’s a gun free zone, which means if you follow the law you can not carry a gun to defend yourself against people that do not follow the law. People seem to miss that irony which they ignore, and let it keep happening. If it was not a gun a mental person would have used something else like a homemade bomb.
I haven’t seen any information on Holmes political associations. He was apparently a Phd student at the University of Colorado-Denver and told the cops he was the Joker. It sounds to me like he’s an evil nut, politics are irrelevant in this case.
It’s a sad day in America. My heart goes out to those who have lost loved ones because of the actions of one evil man.
You are right, Steven. Political gain should not enter into this story, but it already has. It’s too bad the left can’t pass the opportunity to play on fear and get another chance of passing laws that restrict our right to keep and bear arms.
Unfortunately the left never pauses for a moment to pray before they start in on the political gain. ABC claimed the shooting was by a Tea Party person, others start in on the gun control debate. They did the same thing with Gabby Giffords last year. It’s ridiculous.
Wow, you guys see conspiracies everywhere.
Experience tells me the left will use this tragedy to promote stricter gun control laws. They have done it before and they are already doing it again.
What conspiracy?
From balloon-juice.com:
“R- Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.
D- Yes, but guns make it very easy to kill people in large quantities. He would not have been able to stab 71 people.
R- Stop trying to politicize this tragedy! What we need are not fewer guns, but more guns. If only someone else in that theatre had had a gun, they would have been able to stop him in his tracks.
D- Yes. Nothing could go wrong with crossfire in a dark theatre. This is absurd. There is a clear lesson here, and we need to do something about the ease with which people get firearms.
R- There’s no lesson to be learned, the guy was crazy. You can’t stop every crazy person.
D- We could try to make it harder for crazy people to walk around with a shotgun, a rifle, two handguns, and gas cannisters.
R- I knew Obama and you liberals were coming for our guns. Second Amendment!
And after 48 hours, the topic will die down as me move on to the next scandal/tragedy du jour, and then we can have this same exact conversation again the next time someone murders a dozen people with a gun.”
Pretty well sums it up, seems to me…
The trouble with your argument is that so far, there is no reason to believe red flags would have been raised with this shooter. The accounts I have read say he was considered a brilliant science student. Clearly, something was off with him, but would stricter gun laws have prevented him from planning and carrying out this shooting? Most likely, the answer is no.
So you are going with “R- There’s no lesson to be learned, the guy was crazy. You can’t stop every crazy person”. Cool.
There are lessons to be learned but not along the lines of gun control.
And as typical the liberal wants to restrict the second amendment rights of everyone in order to stop a handful of crazies who could get guns illegally if they wanted to.
Your second amendment rights are already restricted. You can’t keep a rocket launcher, or fly around in your own fully-armed p-51. You can’t keep mortars in the house, or drive around in a tank. Try building a nuke and see what happens. The right to keep and bear arms is already a hypothetical. A line has already been drawn, and it’s been moved in the past.
I’m obviously talking from australia, where we don’t have quite the same problem. I think it’s partly about the availability of guns – we don’t for example, have a right to carry a concealed handgun. I could BUY a handgun, but I’d have to follow some rules. And we don’t have any (legal) automatic rifles or pistols. We do have a heck of a lot of long arms, though. Probably more (per head of population) than the US does. I think the real issue is culture. There isn’t the same undercurrent of people who see guns as “the equalizer” or a hefty way to solve problems. I think we still have the same level of “guns as recreation” culture, though. I have friends who hunt and shoot (I’ve tried target shooting with an old WWII .303 SLR – with a scope – it was a lark, and I can see the attraction, but I kept jumping whenever anyone pulled a trigger). We’re just missing the other part – the idea that guns are for using against people (the motivation of the second amendment, as it happens).
In any case, these mass shootings aren’t the real problem. They’re just big enough to get news coverage. It’s the background level of ordinary gun violence that’s probably more important, and more likely to be addressable. I can’t see how you’re going to fix that, not as long as policymakers and police have their hands tied. But good luck
The background of gun violence is exacerbated by a ridiculous drug policy. Despite Hollywood and the media glamorizing the “wild west” the fact is that there weren’t all that many wild west shoot outs. So while people think there’s a historical gun problem in the US, it’s really more fact than fiction. The reason why there is so much gun violence in this country, particularly in Chicago, Detroit and DC is because of our absurd drug policies which have created the gang violence culture.
Well, I’m not an exert on wild west history, but my impression is that the level of crime and violence, like all things, depended a lot on where you were. I don’t think that piece of history can be used to uphold the “armed populace is a polite populace”, because I don’t think it was actually all that peaceful. But I’m talking out of the top of my head (as me ole’ mum would say). I’m going to guess that’s one of those “contested” bits of history.
I think your theory probably works well to explain inner-city gang violence … but not so well at explaining other phenomena, like the 9000 or so kids who turn up in emergency wards in a surveyed year, after being shot by some other kid (sometimes deliberately) who was playing with a gun (more or less, I know I’m going to get a demand for a reference for that one …). I also think the theory would be vastly improved by the addition of alcohol as a relevant drug. Nothing makes otherwise normal people act stupid like booze does.
“Gansta culture” astonishes me. I’m speculating, but it has genuinely always struck me as at least partly a made-up representation of a lifestyle that didn’t actually exist until it was invented by the entertainment industry (sort of like there wasn’t any “grunge scene” in seattle until nirvana invented it). And it creates aspirations that cannot possibly do any of its followers any good. If I were part of some vast conspiracy to pick a minority and destroy it, I think I’d be hard pressed to do better than dreaming up gansta rap and its associated aesthetic.
Now … drug policy. That’s a whole other thing. The “war on drugs” has been lost, it seems. But is it really possible (or ethical) or decriminalise things that, when used as intended, can kill, drive insane or otherwise destroy their users? Where would be draw the line between a drug and a poison? It’s a practical question, and it will come up. It’s an honest question – I don’t know the answer, and I’m probably considered pretty far-left by US standards.
I’ve never heard the 9000 children figure. I’d be interested in seeing where it comes from. As for so-called ‘gansgta culture’ I actually think the opposite is true. I think in the 80′s the gangs created gangsta culture and Hollywood and the music industry ran with it and made it into something more glamorous than it really was. These days I think most of the gangsta culture is driven by Hollywood though, particularly when you have white suburban kids acting like their gangstas. It’s a most ridiculous sight.
As for the drug question, as time goes on I’ve gone more libertarian on the matter. I’m tired of paying for prison sentences for people who are in possession of drugs and I’m tired of paying for the violence associated with drug gangs. The illegalization of drugs stems from the progressive era here in America and the sooner we rid ourselves of progressive policies the better off we’ll be.
As expect, I’m wrong about that 9000 figure. That’s not visits. That’s deaths. And 2/3rds weren’t accidents:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111017092229.htm
I read about it in SciAm (NewSci?) last year and filed it in my fallible brain.
We should remember the rule about large numbers, though (which I’m making up as I type this). Get enough people together and ALL statistics are massive (do the math on background mortality some time – it’ll do your head in). There are (according to another google search) 36,000 people admitted to US emergency wards due to toboggan injuries. That said … 9000 kids dying needlessly in a year is kind of a problem.
I’m not sure about libertarianism. I see the appeal, and I think I can probably see eye to eye with libertarians on a lot of things (conservatives too – just not wingnuts, and just not mouth-foaming moonbats). But overall I think it’s a cop-out (sorry). We need government. We can’t survive as nation-states without one – we’d be picked off as individuals while the states that bothered to get organised hogged all the good stuff to themselves. So once we agree on the need, then the rest is really just negotiating the price. You’re either in the conversation or you’re not.
Anyhow. You’d better go to bed, and I should get on with the drinking. Night!
The 9,000 figure is overstated based on the article you sent. They’re counting children 0-19. I have a hard time calling 18 and 19 year olds children, especially when they’re considered adults in every state in the US. Furthermore, my suspicion is that the overwhelming majority of these deaths and injuries occur to people 13 and over, mostly in gang or other illegal activity.
I’ve never argued we don’t need government. We need government to protect our right to life, liberty and property. Beyond that government has become a mass infringement on our liberty and freedom.
Oh, and it occurred to me while I was picking up the pizza that the .303 wasn’t an SLR – it was a bolt-action. I think that probably means it was closer to WWI. Quite a bit of fun, though.
“1986 Batman comic had the exact same storyline as this morning’s shooting”
No. It didn’t. It really didn’t. There are parallels to be drawn with one single scene, but only if you squint. The scene with the joker and the chat show tza tza doesn’t involve guns – it involves flying baby robots shooting smile gas.
Far out.
Fair enough, I don’t read comic books and relied on a media report. As is typical media reports on the first day of a tragedy can be sketchy.
Sorry for grouching. I’m just exasperated by the ridiculous blame-fest and speculate-a-thon that takes place every time this happens. I’m pleased to see that the colorado p.d. is refusing (for now) to talk about motivation. They appear to have learned the lesson of the loughner business, which didn’t do anyone any favors. But it doesn’t stop the media from just making stuff up in the absence of facts. Gah!
Once upon a time (a simpler, more gentle time), reporters took the view that it wasn’t enough to be first if they were wrong. Sadly, we’ve moved on from that. “First to be wrong” is now a perfectly viable business model.
They have to fill up 24 hours these days. I liked the police chief’s presser last night, he wasn’t going to say anything. Yet those fools in the media kept asking him questions that they had to know he wasn’t going to answer. He must have refused to ask at least 10 questions, all of them predictable no comments.
One of the ironies of this business is that a central theme in the comic in question was the way the news media manipulated the story. I’m not actually a hard core comic fan – I just happened to work in a comic shop back in the late 80′s/early 90′s while I was a student
And I’m opinionated.