The Shootings in Aurora, Colorado
The events surrounding the shooting in Aurora, Colorado compel me to write about the issue of guns in America.
My interest is solely to present information that will help you think rationally about these events. Developing some long-term solution to either a short-term problem or a non-problem leads to an extra judicial confinement of human freedom.
From what we know at this moment about the events in the theater, a very bright, but troubled individual planned to commit mass murder in the city. Apparently he planned to commit the murders at a movie theater on opening night for the latest Batman movie.
His hair was dyed red in imitation of an evil character in Batman movies; and he is said to have told police that he was “the Joker,” the antagonist in previous Batman movies.
Over the previous couple of months he had spent a considerable amount of money purchasing some 6000 rounds of ammunition – including 3000 rounds of .223 ammunition for an AR-15 semiautomatic long gun. He purchased two .40 mm Glock semi-automatic pistols with an undisclosed amount of ammunition, one Remington 12-gauge shotgun with ammo, and the AR-15. He had purchased a special 100 round clip for the AR-15, and full body bullet resistant protection. All of these purchases – we understand at present – were legal.
He purchased a ticket for the premier of the new Batman movie; “The Dark Knight Rises.” He showed up at the theater in normal clothes moved in with the crowd before the midnight start and took a seat in the room.
Apparently sometime when the movie was just beginning, James Holmes slipped out of the theater through an emergency exit at the right side in the front, propped the door so he could re-enter through it; otherwise it would lock and prevent him from reentering.
Apparently he donned his gear, grabbed his guns and ammo, and about 15 minutes later reentered through the door he had propped open. An exciting scene with shooting was happening on the screen when he threw two smoke devices – perhaps tear gas – into the room.
Then the shootings began. Sometime later 12 people were dead and 59 wounded.
Mr. Holmes apparently departed the theater the way he had sneaked in to commit the murders, and was found by police standing beside his car. There were reports his gun had jammed.
There were no shots fired by Mr. Holmes or the police outside the theater although it appeared he had more ammo and had perhaps previously decided to shoot it out with the police. He was peacefully taken into custody, and eventually will face trial on first degree murder charges among others.
I cover this briefly because even before the sound of the discharges were dead, the smell of cordite had dispersed, or the bodies had been removed from the room, some media, some politicians, and some others were making the case that we need gun control to prevent incidents like this.
The List of “Leaders” Who Want to Dismantle the Bill Of Rights
New York City Mayor Bloomberg former Democrat hack turned Independent Hack so he could run for office immediately asked what Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney planned to do about guns. Seems like only yesterday he was instituting the ban on large sugared drinks.
Then there was former U.S. federal prosecutor, Democrat, arrogant talk host, Client Number 9, Eliot Spitzer the whore monger who expressed that prostitution is good for him, but he wanted to ensure that everyone know he was in favor of gun control.
Mr. Ebert writing for the New York Times is so out of touch he addressed the “theory” that an armed citizenry should be able to prevent an episode like this. “In theory, the citizenry needs to defend itself. Not a single person at the Aurora, Colo., theater shot back, but the theory will still be defended.” Mr. Ebert confirms for us that nothing appearing in the New York Times – except the ads regulated by the FTC – contains reliable information. The theater in question is a “gun-free” zone, so all normal and good citizens were forbidden from carrying a weapon into the theater last Friday night. Had they been permitted, lives may have been saved.
Mr. Obama is a gun control freak, and openly wants to deny American citizens their Constitutional right to own guns.
Let There be Light
Ankle-biting liberals – almost universally Democrats – can’t be trusted to find their mouth with their eyes are open even if they get to use both hands. For their edification (and yours) I offer the following.
The first semi automatic rifle was manufactured in 1895; that is 118 years ago. Rifles of this type have been used by tens of millions of people all over the world for sport, hunting and fun. The first semi automatic shotgun was manufactured in 1902. For math-challenged politicians and others who think themselves qualified to make decisions for everyone else, that is 110 years ago.
Weapons do not kill people. Weapons are inert. If guns should be banned because people use them to kill people, then knives, forks, box cutters, pharmaceutical drugs, fertilizer, baseball bats, rolling pins – and for that matter – hands that batter and strangle must also be banned. Pieces of lumber, sidewalks, nails, automobiles, U-Haul trucks, ropes, cliffs, rocks, and other assorted weapons must also be banned. Well, that’s if we expect rationality from our idiotic “leaders.”
Incoherence is the hallmark of liberals. They learned from Rousseau that everyone is born innocent and good, and that they are corrupted by corrupt institutions. If this is the organizing principle of your anthropology, then you MUST NEVER hold an individual accountable for heinous acts: “It’s the guns!” “It’s the Batman movies,” “It’s Rap music,” “It’s the culture of America where people are permitted to think independent thoughts;” and worst of all, “This is what you get when you permit people to exercise a right recognized by the Constitution.”
The Constitution; the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment did not cause the shootings in Aurora, Colorado.
What do Gun Laws Accomplish?
Consider the Democrat Party stranglehold on the city of Chicago. In very truth, the Democrat Party’s control over Chicago is as strong as the Communist Party’s control over the Kremlin during the cold war, or Mr. Castro’s over Cuba.
Chicago is the city of Mr. Obama’s political rise, and it has some of the most stringent gun laws in America. Washington D.C. the city of his current residence has some of the most stringent gun control laws.
Chicago has averaged 450 murders a year since 2005, but as of mid July this year the city had almost 300 in the first 6 months – that’s about 50 a month. Shame that we don’t hear much about those dead. It’s as if they aren’t worth as much as the Colorado dead…Oh, no, wait; Aurora isn’t a great Democrat city, it isn’t the political home of Barack Obama. Apparently that makes it okay to dramatize the Colorado murders, and ignore the Chicago murders.
In terms of numbers of murders, the Aurora, Colorado theater murders are equaled every 8 days in Chicago on average despite all their gun laws.
Chicago is the city where if you are a law-abiding citizen and you are willing to pay for and pass a firearms safety course; where if you have sufficiently good reasons to own a gun, and if you are willing register your gun, and promise to live by all the regulations – you might be permitted to exercise your Constitutional right to own a gun.
[Breaking news on Chicago gun violence: While 12 people were murdered and 59 wounded overnight last Friday in Aurora, Colorado; 3 people were murdered and 18 wounded in Chicago.]
In addition, the murder rate for murders committed using handguns increased after Chicago instituted the gun ban.
It’s interesting to see how much higher Chicago’s homicide rate is with their harsh gun laws when compared to the rest of the U.S. where states do not have such laws.
Why should Chicago’s murder rate be so high when Kennesaw, Georgia has a violent crime rate 78.8% lower than the national average, and a small fraction of what it is in the rest of the state? Racial makeup isn’t the issue – the city is 64.2% White, 22.3% Black. Chicago is 45.0% white, 32.9% black. It’s obvious that culture makes all the difference, and there is a culture in Chicago that none of us want in our home town. The culture in Kennesaw is conservative unlike Chicago which is liberal, and in 1982 the city council in Kennesaw passed a law that every household had to own a gun.
Consider, if you were a criminal would you rather ply your trade in Chicago or Kennesaw?
Washington D.C. is the city where Mr. Obama lives now, and it has instituted severe limitations on gun ownership as well. In fact the laws (written by the U.S. Congress by the way) were so out of touch, part of the law was overturned by the Supreme Court. Subsequent to the more restrictive parts of the D.C. laws being overturned permitting normal citizens could carry guns, the murder rate declined.
Licensed Gun Owners Are Not the Problem
Over the last 4 years about 60,000 killings have occurred in the U.S. Statistics show that less than one of these out of every 200 (less than 100 out of 20,000) is done by a duly licensed gun owner – all the rest have been with stolen or otherwise illegally obtained guns. Worse, some of these attributed to licensed gun owners didn’t even involve a gun! Whenever a licensed gun owner is involved with a killing – even with a knife – it is counted as a licensed gun owner murder. Even worse than that, many of these murders are not criminally murders at all – they are done in self-defense by legal gun owners protecting themselves of others.
Guns are used more than a million times each year for self protection when no shots are fired or there would be many more murders every year.
I wonder what the real motive is for people like Mr. Obama and others who want to control legitimate, normal, law-abiding citizens and prevent them from owning or carrying guns.
They know that gun control has no effect on anything other than to increase the number of murders, rapes, assaults, and armed robbery by people who refuse to obey the law. But they are ideologues, and have no other song to sing. Besides they fear looking foolish by rethinking the facts and changing their position.
I fear they may want crime to increase because the situation would get so bad it would give them opportunity to confiscate all guns from everyone, stop their sale altogether anywhere in the country, and forbid the manufacture of ammunition except in government controlled plants for use by police agencies. Then they could really control all human behavior.
No, the Constitution is not the problem. I am fully comfortable with states making laws that institute reasonable restrictions on people having access to weapons. For example, a child should not be able to purchase a gun or obtain a concealed carry permit, nor should a person convicted of serious crimes using a gut have automatic access to purchase a gun. It goes without saying that an insane person should not be permitted to purchase a weapon and/or have a concealed carry permit.
First, the states should make any laws regarding any restriction on the ownership of weapons, because the Second Amendment was written to prevent the federal government from making such laws.
Second, any laws passed in any state must be statewide. When counties or cities make separate laws, confusion results among the law-abiding citizenry. Besides, city-wide laws regarding weapon purchases or carry restrictions are completely useless.
Third, when a state makes any law regarding restricting access to guns, they must act in compliance with the state constitution and any federal laws that apply.
If the citizens of the state don’t like the laws, they can protest them, throw out the utopian idiots, and elect a legislature that understands the principles of liberty.