I have hesitated to write about this subject for one main reason. I wanted to show respect to the victims of the shooting in Aurora, Colorado, and to their families and not make this about gun control. What James Holmes has done is an unspeakable tragedy. No matter his motivation, there is no excuse for what he has done. No matter if he claims insanity, he has no real defense to explain the cold and calculating manner in which he planned and executed the shooting that left 12 innocent people dead, and many more wounded.
In the wake of the shooting, there have already been attempts to politicize it. Namely, to renew the calls for stricter gun laws in our country. I hold the opinion that the first and only response liberals are capable of to a tragedy such as this is to call for more laws that will do nothing to ease the suffering, or prevent this from happening again. Nevertheless, they continue that response. The shooting in Aurora is no exception.
As I said at the beginning of this post, I have hesitated to write about the renewed calls for gun control, but after being alerted to a cover story in the NY Daily News by Pirate’s Cove, I felt I needed to put words to paper, or fingers to keyboard, as it were. I could not believe the ignorance and the stupidity that would drive any responsible media outlet to publish a headline that says “How many more must die, Mr. President?”
In the article, the Editorial Board of the NY Daily News says James Holmes was not acting alone.
The police chief in Aurora, Colo., said he is confident that massacre gunman James Holmes acted alone. The police chief was dead wrong.
Standing at Holmes’ side as he unleashed an AR-15 assault rifle and a shotgun and a handgun was Wayne LaPierre, political enforcer of the National Rifle Association.
Standing at Holmes’ side as he sprayed bullets and buckshot into a crowded movie theater were Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, a President and a would-be President, who have bowed to the NRA’s dictates and who responded to the slaughter Friday with revolting, useless treacle.
In no way am I trying to diminish the tragedy of this shooting, but for the NY Daily News, or any other responsible media outlet to try to lay the blame at the feet of President Obama is past ludicrous. Just because he has not pushed hard enough for stricter gun control laws to suit them does not make him responsible for the shooting in Aurora. Just because the NRA has stood in the gap against stricter gun control laws does not mean they should be demonized for the actions of James Holmes. Neither is Mitt Romney responsible because he hasn’t called for strict bans on guns in the aftermath of the shooting.
There is a gun culture in America. Many of us own guns and use them regularly. Some of that use is recreational, some of it is for self-defense. We were given that right by the 2nd Amendment and it spite of the attacks on it by the liberal anti-gun crowd, it was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2010. Individuals do have the right to keep and bear arms. The NRA is trashed by the liberal media for standing up for that right, but that doesn’t make what they do any less important.
There is also an anti-gun culture in America. Many people believe guns should be completely outlawed, except for law enforcement. I can not understand that sentiment, as such a law, if passed, would only prevent law-abiding citizens from exercising their rights under the Constitution. It would not keep guns out of the hands of criminals. The only way to even come close to accomplishing that is to pass such strict gun control laws as to ban the manufacture and sale of all guns. We all know that isn’t going to happen.
The anti-gun culture has been successful in declaring certain areas as gun-free zones. Schools are supposed to be gun-free, as are many government buildings. Some business owners have also declared their place of business to be a gun-free zone. No guns allowed, they say. Such was the theater in Aurora, Colorado. No one had a gun, except for James Holmes.
Let’s look at James Holmes just for a moment. Information about him is still sparse, as the police are releasing very little of what they have learned. We do know he legally purchased every gun he used in the shooting. They were not black market weapons. The clip he used on the AR-15 rifle was a high-capacity clip, but as those kinds of clips are apt to do, it jammed in the middle of the shooting. That must have been why he came prepared with another weapon. Again, this clip was purchased legally, as was the Remington 870 Pump Shotgun he was carrying.
There is no information we have at this time that leads me to believe red flags should have been raised by Holmes’ purchase of these guns. He wasn’t on a watch list and had no history of mental problems. He never acted out and was considered a brilliant science student. Should we have such strict gun control laws that would have prevented James Holmes, an otherwise law-abiding citizen, from purchasing a semi-automatic shotgun, a semi-automatic AR-15 rifle, and two semi-automatic Glock pistols? If such gun control laws are the wish, where will it stop?
For some reason, the anti-gun culture has a special hatred of guns. Any criminal act perpetrated by the use of a gun has a special stigma attached to it. Such crimes are given a special significance in the crime statistics that are studied so thoroughly. As if the crimes committed with guns are more evil or more criminal than the crimes committed with a different weapon.
What about the stabbings that are committed every year? Are the persons responsible any less evil for having used a knife to commit their crimes? Are the victims of said crimes any less dead or injured? Do their families suffer any less because a gun was not used to kill or injure their loved ones?
What about the victims of the Oklahoma City bombing? Are those 168 people any less dead because a gun was not used in the bombing?
What about the people who are beaten to death every year? Over 5 children are killed every day in America because of abuse. That is over 1800 children each year. Most of them are physical abuse cases, with no weapons involved. Are those children any less dead because a gun was not used? I think not.
My basic point is this. Guns are not evil and they are not the cause of the violence problem we have in America. They are no more evil than knives, cars, alcohol, drugs, etc. People are the ones committing these acts of violence, not guns, or any other weapon. Passing gun control laws that are even more restrictive is not the answer to the problem.
What we have in America is a people problem, not a gun control problem. If guns are banned, will we then ban people?