Categorized | Opinion

Aurora Colorado Shooting Proves We Have a Shortage of Guns in the Hands of Hero’s

While the echo of the gunshots was still in the air, the usual anti gun crowd again began the call for more gun control. New York Mayor Bloomberg was one of the first out of the gate calling for tougher laws.

Exactly how much more gun control would have been required to prevent the horrible murders in Aurora, Colorado? The theater was a “gun free safe zone” and Colorado has already closed the Gun Show “Loophole” that seems to get the loudest cries whenever there is a shooting in states that have not clamped down on what are essentially private gun sales.

And Aurora, Colorado does allow concealed weapons permits, but it is against the law to actually shoot the gun you are carrying unless you are at a shooting range.

So, essentially, even if the theater didn’t already ban guns, using a gun to stop the shooter would have landed the hero in jail.

So, do we need changes in the gun laws?


It is utterly ridiculous for a state or locality to issue concealed carry permits and also have a law on the books that outlaws using the weapon even if your life is in danger.

What’s the point in having a weapon if you can’t use it legally to protect your own life or the lives of others?

Apparently, the laws of Aurora and Colorado as well as the rules of the theater worked. Nobody had a gun except the killer. Ironically, the act of mass murder is already against the law in every state and that failed to deter the gunman.

This pretty much proves the theory that law abiding citizens will obey the law and law breakers will ignore the law.

And while the murders in some other mass killing incidents have had serious signs of mental imbalance that was ignored by our politically correct society, such as the Fort Hood killer who was a radical Muslim and the Virginia Tech killer who showed signs of serious mental impairment. In the Fort Hood case, signs of potential trouble were ignored out of fear of offending Muslims and the Va. Tech killer was able to buy firearms because authorities did not want the “stigma” of mental illness on the mass murder’s record.

So far, the Colorado killer was nothing more than a bit eccentric. Something of a loner. But most who knew him didn’t really get the vibe of sociopath and mass  murderer. By all accounts, he was very bright. A great student, although his academic performance in seeking his PHD had become less than stellar and he was in the process of dropping out of school.

An early statement by his mother that authorities “had the right man” is the exception to the otherwise normal-ish young man turned mass killer.

So how can we prevent this type of thing from happening again?

While some cases such as this seem to have a number of warning signs that were missed, there were few obvious red flags here. And short of Obama issuing a presidential order to ignore the 2nd Amendment and round up all the guns in America (which is something those on the left would love to see), what can be done to stop a killer such as this, or at least mitigate the deaths and injuries?

Since the guns are not going away, and as the bans in the theater prove, someone willing to ignore the death penalty isn’t really going to worry about being asked to leave the theater, is there another option?

Of course there is. There are a number of options.

We could station millions of armed guards and police every few feet all across the country. Expensive and impracticable.

We could totally ban guns and in a thousand years or so the millions of guns already in circulation will probably rust and become unusable.

We could make it harder to get guns, but as we have learned, killers and criminals are going to get the guns anyway and use them against an unarmed and defenseless public.

But this killer was apparently pretty informed on making explosives. Had he set off some home made bombs in a packed theater, the odds are that the number of dead would be far higher either from the initial blast or from the fire that would surely follow.

We already have police. They were actually in the theater complex, but not in the theaters themselves. It still took long enough to respond that 71 people were killed or shot, even with police in the building.

The answer is obvious. We should encourage more citizens to arm themselves to provide the first line of defense in case the unthinkable happens. Even a killer in body armor is vulnerable from some angle. And dealing with people shooting back would at least serve as enough of a distraction to allow more people to escape and police officers to respond.

At least 3 hero’s gave their lives shielding others in that theater, and there were probably more. There were a lot of members of the Armed Forces in the theater, all of them unarmed and thwarted by Colorado laws from firing even if they did have a weapon.

On 9/11, the plane that went down in the middle of Pennsylvania had several hero’s aboard that shielded a lot of people in Washington.

In any given situation, ordinary citizens do the extraordinary to protect and defend those they love and even total strangers.

We have enough guns in this country that there is no way to keep them out of the hands of people willing to face the death penalty in order to kill.

But we do have a shortage of guns in the hands of hero’s.

Gun laws need to be based in reality. Shutting down private sales of guns, or “loopholes” as the anti gun lobby calls them did nothing in Colorado. Further restricting gun ownership and use by potential hero’s is counterproductive and will lead to more mass killings.

We need to stop the political correctness and face reality when it comes to mentally unstable people and radicals. And local law enforcement should offer free training sessions that are based on the likelihood of  private citizens being in a situation like the ones in Colorado and Virginia Tech. And locking up weapons on a military base is absolutely crazy.

The fact is, it will take the police (or the MP’s)  some time to respond and secure any such situation.

If there was a good possibility that there would be several armed individuals in the theater that night, or at Fort Hood or Va Tech, that would likely serve to do what the possibility of a death sentence did not. These people intent on mass murder would have to calculate a far lower chance of “success” in killing a lot of innocent people and the very real probability of being gunned down themselves after only a shot or two.

Banks face armed robberies all the time, but to my knowledge, no one has even attempted an armed robbery at a gun show.

We need changes in the gun laws that accept the fact that the best protection when someone starts shooting into a crowd is honest, law abiding citizens that are ready to respond in these horrific situations.

I prefer shaking the hand of a live hero who dispatched a killer within his Second Amendment rights than attending the funeral of a dead hero who gave his or her life to protect others.


About Tom White

Tom is a US Navy Veteran, owns an Insurance Agency and is currently an IT Manager for a Virginia Distributor. He has been published in American Thinker, currently writes for the Richmond Examiner as well as Virginia Right! Blog. Tom lives in Hanover County, Va and is involved in politics at every level and is a Recovering Republican who has finally had enough of the War on Conservatives in progress with the Leadership of the GOP on a National Level.

17 Responses to “Aurora Colorado Shooting Proves We Have a Shortage of Guns in the Hands of Hero’s”

  1. Mike Wilburt says:

    While we will never ever know, one does have to wonder if the outcome would have been different if one or more of the several hundred in the theater had returned fire.
    Yes, he was wearing significant body armour, but he was also an obvious coward. Had lead started coming his way, would he have stopped and fled? Would he have huddled in a corner for cover and stopped shooting at the crowd?
    Would it have simply diverted his actions enough to limit the carnage?
    We’ll never know.

    But what we do know is that in the 60-90 seconds it took for the police to respond, 12 were killed and dozens injured.
    How could that outcome have been any worse if there were armed citizens in the crowd?

    PS – as I write this, the killer, James Holmes is appearing in court with flaming orange hair.

    • Clay Alward says:

      When was the last time you heard of someone attempting a robbery at a gun store? Ever notice that practically every employee is wearing a gun?

      We hear about armed citizens who have to shoot to protect themselves or others. What you don’t hear about are the occasions when a crime is prevented because someone has a gun but never has to fire it.

      If making guns ilegal stops crime, how is it that the highest violent crime rates are in places with the most stringent anti-gun regulations?

  2. Jeff says:

    Even the most extreme gun control option has been proven to be ineffective in Australia. Illegal guns flood the black market and Don Weatherburn, the head of Australia’s crime statistics has admitted that there has not been any reduction in gun homicide since the law was passed. Meanwhile violence syrocketed though law enforcement measures have reduced overall crime by 33$ (both violent and property crimes) by 33% since the peak, after the law property crimes stayed constant but violent crime rates doubled, so they sill aren’t back to where they were before the law was passed even though they are now spending more on law enforcement. Ironically suicides also increased in the two years after the ban (people who wanted to kill themselves switched to hanging) but in this area the increased efforts to remedy the situation through suicide intervention paid off an they were able to reduce the suicide rate to pre-ban levels. The UK had basically the same crime rate results after their ban but no official there has gone on the record confirming whether there was any change in gun killings. The UKs historically low murder rate and excellent EMS (it helps that its a small, densely populated nation so it is impossible to be more than 100 miles from a trauma center and they can put more resources in a lot fewer trauma centers) complicates the picture since better ERs are very effective in reducing murder rates by saving victims’ lives.

  3. Steven says:

    What needs to be said in regards to military personnel:

    1) Due to Clinton’s ban – no military member can carry a firearm on post anymore. So, even at Fort Hood, a place filled to the gills with combat veterans (well trained and can react to fire correctly) no one could defend themselves.

    2) Not sure how it is in other states, but here in Alaska the military personnel are under orders not to carry weapons EVEN OFF POST. Sure, for hunting and such, but for little else. And, again, most folks these days are combat vets with multiple tours.

    3) I saw media coverage that brought up 4 cases of mass shootings, and I was (NOT) stunned that the reporter did not notice the common thread. The four brought up (on the green screen) were:
    a) Columbine (a school – therefore a GUN FREE ZONE)
    b) VA Tech (a college that was a GUN FREE ZONE)
    c) Fort Hood (due to Clinton’s Exec Order – a GUN FREE ZONE)
    d) Aurora, CO (the theatre was a GUN FREE ZONE)

    In none of these planned murders did the killer go to a police station, where EVERYONE is armed. They did not go to a “general population” area, where some of the people are armed. No, in EVERY case they went to a GUN FREE ZONE, and opened fire.

    Did the reporter make that connection? (hold on, I’m still laughing)

    They are trapped by ideology, and facts are only there to support that pre-conceived answer, or to be dismissed or refuted.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge

Tom White Says:

Nothing is more conservative than a republican wanting to get their majority back. And nothing is more liberal than a republican WITH a majority.

Sign up for Virginia Right Once Daily Email Digest

No Spam - ever! We send a daily email with the posts of the previous day. Unsubscribe at any time.
* = required field

Follow Us Anywhere!