Bryan Strawser

Of course, what he fails to realize is that no one in that theater could legally carry a weapon.  It’s prohibited by Colorado law to do so - so of course no one shot back.

I’ll note it also didn’t stop the shooter from committing his awful crime.

parislemon:

I just quoted Roger Ebert’s excellent New York Times op-ed about the Aurora shooting, but really, you should read the whole thing. The entire thing is quote-worthy. 

Another key excerpt:

Should this young man — whose nature was apparently so obvious to his mother that, when a ABC News reporter called, she said “You have the right person” — have been able to buy guns, ammunition and explosives? The gun lobby will say yes. And the endless gun control debate will begin again, and the lobbyists of the National Rifle Association will go to work, and the op-ed thinkers will have their usual thoughts, and the right wing will issue alarms, and nothing will change. And there will be another mass murder.

That James Holmes is insane, few may doubt. Our gun laws are also insane, but many refuse to make the connection. The United States is one of few developed nations that accepts the notion of firearms in public hands. 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.

If anyone’s stance is really going to be that citizens need guns to protect themselves, it should be viewed that this idea failed yesterday in a way far worse than if guns were outlawed in this country. Nearly 100 people failed to use their gun rights to protect themselves. And 12 people have died as a result. A complete and utter failure of that right.

Of course, that right is actually preposterous. It’s 2012, not 1712.