Crime

‘Real News From The Blaze’: Gun Control Discussion Elevates With ‘Dark Knight’ Shooting

James Holmes appeared in a Colorado courtroom Monday for a hearing on the heinous Friday shooting of over 70 ‘Dark Knight’ moviegoers–killing 12–that the 24-year-old is accused of. While both presidential campaigns and most commentators avoided politicizing the tragedy, there have been a few notable exceptions from individuals advocating for stricter gun control laws in the United States.

Not long after the incident was reported, CNN host Piers Morgan tweeted that “America has got to do something about its gun laws.” During his show Friday night, Morgan clashed with a guest who challenged the anchor for debating divisive gun control laws on a day that the guest thought should be focused on national unity. Jason Alexander, known f0r portraying George Constanza on Seinfeld, released a lengthy statement over the weekend challenging gun rights advocates in reaction to the Colorado tragedy. Perhaps most notably, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been very outspoken since the attack; criticizing Obama and Romney for avoiding the gun control debate and calling on politicians to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 1994.

On “Real News” Monday the panel discussed the saturation of debate on gun control over the last three days, and broke down flaws in the common knee-jerk reactions that follow horrific events like what happened in Aurora:

Comments (47)

1 2
  • rockhardinc
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 5:44pm

    If gun control laws were to become more restrictive, would it stop the killing of innocent people by those human beings who wish to do evil? Who is the source of all good in the world, Man or our creator as any of us understand him, God. If Man is the source of good, then this act of evil was perpetrated by the gun and therefore noone should have one. If God is the source of all good then the man chose to commit this awful evil act and therefore he should be regulated. Guns cannot act without the intention of the individual who wields them be it for good or for evil. Guns are inanimate objects that simply do what they are directed to do. Guns fulfill the wishes of heroic and just men and women as wilingly as the wishes of evil men and women. The debate is not do guns kill, but what do we do with people who chose to kill with any method. Liberty must be upheld as it is given to us not by lawmakers but by our creator. Anything that limits my ability to defend the life that I have been given, is wrong.

    Report Post »  
  • Saladin
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 5:00pm

    Sooo, Lets see now . Oh, Mexico’s had absolute “Gun Control” ( NO ownership by Anyone but Military & Police ) for decades now! Hows that workin’ ? ( Only 50 thousand killed in the ongoing drug cartel wars in the past year or so ).

    And they want us to tighten up our laws ?

    Brilliant !

    We don’t hear much about that little fact ,do we !

    But lets enact more “feel-good” restrictions on the only people that pay any attention to them , the Law Abiding !

    With the US Fed & local laws there are over 100,000 of them ( laws)on the books now. Has not done anything to prevent any of these horrible acts.

    What is so difficult to comprehend ?

    There have been horrific atrocities commited thruout mans history. Only countered by equal or greater force.

    Just Sayin”

    Report Post »  
  • DannyBoy13
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 4:42pm

    News we didn’t see reported on MSLSD: As of July 13 2012 there were 296 homicides committed murderers using firearms in Chicago. In 2011, there were 411 firearms related murders in Second City.
    Chicago has extremely strictest gun control laws in the United States.
    Why is MSLSD refusing to report these facts?

    Report Post »  
  • Budrow
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 2:43pm

    Same ole argument…it isn’t the guns that kill people. A gun is merely a tool. A tool the same as a knife or a box-cutter, or a rope, or an automobile, or a few ounces of arsenic or ethylene-glycol, or rat poison in the popcorn salt shaker.

    Reporting kooks because you think they are crazy and send out red-flags in your opinion will be treated by law enforcement with the same concern as a barking-dog or wounded bird in your yard. The cops won’t care or give any weight to such reports.

    The world is full of deviants such as Holmes. If they decide to do something and are insistent in getting it done, they will get it done.

    Holmes could have accomplished the same end with the same carnage by driving a stolen loaded dump truck into the theater building. Then what would be outlawed? Maybe tandem axle dump trucks or maybe gravel.

    There isn’t much anyone will ever be able to do about these kind of people once they have made their minds up to do it. The safest bet is to have everyone in the theater armed to the teeth with legal weapons and stop the sick bastard when the first shots ring out.

    Report Post »  
    • thx1138v2
      Posted on July 24, 2012 at 3:59pm

      Actually it doesn’t take arming everyone to the teeth. The same thing can be accomplished by making the perpetrator unsure how many people are armed. That is the major function of the Concealed Carry Permit. Everyone may be armed to the teeth or half the people or 2 of the people or none of the people. But if the assailant doesn’t know, he won’t go there.

      Establishing gun free zones is the same as establishing designated killing fields because the assailant can be reasonably certain that noone is armed except himself.

      Report Post »  
  • LemonCreek
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 6:55am

    NRA all the way, please join today !

    Report Post »  
  • shammo
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 6:27am

    Holder made him do it!!

    Report Post »  
  • Chet Hempstead
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 3:18am

    The headline is obviously wildly inaccurate. Elevating a discussion means making it a more intelligent discussion. Saying the same old crap louder is escalating a discussion.

    Report Post »  
  • LandShark
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 3:14am

    Darn, double post, The Blaze should allow for editing of the original persons posts, sorry for it.
    My rant was too long, I broke it up, cut/copied/pasted it and it fubared. Sorry.

    Report Post »  
  • LandShark
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 3:09am

    Part III

    This is the wedge that will drive us to be impotent, much like the tactic used to make smoking cigarettes/cigars a virtual crime today(Please don’t off on smoking, its a point I’m trying to make, nothing pro or con for it, just a point here) that the government and others used to get thier agenda across. We should find a common ground as our own group to protect ourselves from anti-second amendment zealots. Because thats what they are. We need to reach the fence sitters also.
    I am not eloquent with words,hope my points come across.

    Report Post »  
  • LandShark
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 3:08am

    Part II
    we should be able to somehow get a louder positive (and sane) pro 2nd Amendment voice out to the general public. AND to all people who own firearms. I ran a gun shop from 2000-2006.
    There are a lot of different groups of people who enjoy firearms:
    (1) Shotgunners (who live for trap and skeet etc.)
    (2) Bench rest shooters(percision long range shooting)
    (3) Cowboy action shooting
    (4) IPSIC shooters
    (5) target pistol shooters(those in leagues)
    (6) a mix of any and all of the above
    (7) whoever and whatever else I left out

    What amazes me is that in all these groups of progun people, you can’t get a majority consensous on what is important to all. Example; when thers is talk of new laws being implemented one group could care less about the needs of another,even in regards to the passage of a law that would errode the 2nd Amendment. If the discussion would be ” the banning of hi-capacity magazines” the shotgun group would consider moot to them because it doesn’t affect them directly. Figure in any variation in that scenerio you want. Think about the gun club, the gun range you belong to. How do these different factions co-exist when your’e there in meetings or are there in general ?

    Report Post »  
  • LandShark
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 3:04am

    Part II
    we should be able to somehow get a louder positive (and sane) pro 2nd Amendment voice out to the general public. AND to all people who own firearms. I ran a gun shop from 2000-2006.
    There are a lot of different groups of people who enjoy firearms:
    (1) Shotgunners (who live for trap and skeet etc.)
    (2) Bench rest shooters(percision long range shooting)
    (3) Cowboy action shooting
    (4) IPSIC shooters
    (5) target pistol shooters(those in leagues)
    (6) a mix of any and all of the above
    (7) whoever and whatever else I left out

    What amazes me is that in all these groups of progun people, you can’t get a majority consensous on what is important to all. Example; when thers is talk of new laws being implemented one group could care less about the needs of another,even in regards to the passage of a law that would errode the 2nd Amendment. If the discussion would be ” the banning of hi-capacity magazines” the shotgun group would consider moot to them because it doesn’t affect them directly. Figure in any variation in that scenerio you want. Think about the gun club, the gun range you belong to. How do these different factions co-exist when your’e there in meetings or are there in general ?
    This is the wedge that will drive us to be impotent, much like the tactic used to make smoking cigarettes/cigars a virtual crime today(Please don’t off on smoking, its a point I’m trying to make, nothing pro or con for it, just a point here) that the government and others u

    Report Post »  
  • LandShark
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 3:04am

    Part I
    The anti-firearm contingent have been paying: “experts” in writing law(s),persons who believe big government should have the big stick (and carrot) for working out their agenda on firearms,much like a regular job.(At least since Clinton) There are people who get paid,who have a job to directly help the government figure out ways to regulate firearms,no… to regulate people with firearms out of existence.Add in all the other looney organizations that willingly give their time to attend anti-gun meetings where their ideas are passed on to other people (who live in la-la land) which get circulated to others who have some degree of clout to have things heard by the right people.I bet you,unfortunately I don’t have a source to point to,that there are a whole lot of Ideas on how to “control firearms” sitting in the drawer of the anti-firearm people in Congress and the White House that deal with any and all possibilities of any tragedy and natural and man made disasters.It shouldn’t faze us and waste our energy to see the spin and lies that come out when a tragedy happens.We all know,because we have seen it,you give an inch,there goes a mile.We should start to become more organized, pull resources together to protect the 2nd Amendment. Wouldn’t it be great if the NRA,Gun Owners of America and all the other groups pulled their resources and members minds and pull into one organization without egos to protect the law abiding pro-gun citizenry.

    Report Post »  
  • NotHereToJudge
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 12:49am

    I had sent the following to a friend on July 16, 2012.
    I’ve cut and pasted the unchanged section of the email that is eerily more relevant right now:

    Many say that Obama signing the U.N. Global Arms Treaty which is currently being discussed and drafted in New York by over 150 World Leaders this week, is an attack against the 2nd amendment!

    Many say that Obama signing the U.N. agreement that will be being discussed is an attack against the 2nd amendment!

    What will be America‘s response to Obama’s Action here?

    How much will the media report on this?

    The conference started on July 2nd and ends July 27, 2012 when President Obama is expected to sign the treaty which is also part of Agenda 21.

    “http://news.investors.com/article/617568/201207091910/arms-treaty-a-global-gun-grab-grab-treaty.htm”
    “http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/”

    Report Post » NotHereToJudge  
  • BryanB
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 12:28am

    The Shooter in Aurora, Colorado, was already breaking the gun laws of his State.

    So having any more gun laws on the books would have no effect.

    And this should be showen to Gun Control Advocates.

    Criminals do not obay Gun Control Laws,,,,,,,,,,,

    http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/StatePatrol-Main/CBON/1251594549010

    Report Post » BryanB  
  • FloridaFarmGirl
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 12:23am

    Gun control is hitting what you aim at. We need our guns more than ever with Obama, Holder etc. in office. Holmes is an evil monster who does not represent the majority of gun owning Americans.

    Report Post »  
  • Sans P.
    Posted on July 24, 2012 at 12:01am

    The solution is to require everyone to own a gun and know how to use it. I’d be happy to spend your tax dollars on a top quality AR-15, a S&W M&P pistol, and a Remington 870 pump Tactical pump shotgun. Of course the mandatory all expenses paid week of training at Thunder Ranch, Gunsite, or Blackhawk would be required.

    And for those “free riders” who don’t get the federally required guns, you’ll have to pay a penalty (i mean tax) for not doing so.

    Report Post »  
    • thx1138v2
      Posted on July 24, 2012 at 4:03pm

      Bravo.

      Today’s times are wilder than the wildest of the real “wild west” of the 1800′s as opposed to that shown in Hollywood which are created by someone writing a script to optimize the violence

      Report Post »  
  • RebelPatriot
    Posted on July 23, 2012 at 10:37pm

    For awesome gun control, spend the money for classes they really improve your handling of your weapon and your confidence to carry in public.

    I contacted both of my congress person Friday night. Saturday I received an email from one explaining they are doing all they can to stop the passing of the UN Treaty banning firearms for civilians.

    I received a message from my other congressman’s office ensuring me they will be able to defeat the passing of the UN treaty.

    I am at the point if King Hussein attempts to enforce the treaty without congress’ approval it will be time to hit the streets in protest for the impeachment of the president. If he takes it upon himself to not uphold the Constitution and ban our right to own firearms he must go immediately. That would be an act of aggression against the American people, more serious than any since Pearl Harbor.

    Report Post »  
  • ShyLow
    Posted on July 23, 2012 at 10:34pm

    The ******** seem to be rubbing off on SE Cupp. Sounds like she is very seriously considering people control…Everyone that just broke-up with a girl-friend or boy-friend would be in front of a SE Cupp lead panel. Maybe those picked last in dodge ball or dropped from the cheerleading squad

    Report Post » ShyLow  
    • DouglassFiller
      Posted on July 24, 2012 at 4:41pm

      Wow, I’m impressed, you actually watched the video. I’m also inclined to agree with you. You can’t really set tight concepts of what is normal without infringing individual liberties. Everyone would be terrified of saying the wrong thing and winding up “visited” by the thought police.

      Report Post » DouglassFiller  
  • obxned
    Posted on July 23, 2012 at 10:19pm

    We DO need to talk about gun control in light of this massacre. We need to know why the State of Colorado, the City of Aurora, and the theater owners forced those people to be totally defenceless. We already know that these mass shootings always are done in ‘gun free’ zones, where the evil doers are safest. Now, as usual, the loud mouthed idiots want to create more places where the citizens are sitting ducks for the next Satan’s little helper that comes along.

    If ‘shame’ and ‘guilt’ were concepts that the left could apply to themselves, Bloomberg et al would be busily committing hari-kari.

    Report Post »  
    • RebelPatriot
      Posted on July 23, 2012 at 10:28pm

      Agreed, they are only creating havens for those who wish to take advantage of the defensless. This is actually proof as to how vulnerable we would all be if we were not able to protect ourselves by carrying firearms on our person.

      The more firearm free places they create the more dangerous the areas become.

      Report Post »  
    • SCREW-WINDOWS
      Posted on July 24, 2012 at 12:52am

      It is not cost effective nor can we afford to have a armed and unionized guard in every theater that is what the libs will want to do.

      Report Post » SCREW-WINDOWS  
    • thx1138v2
      Posted on July 24, 2012 at 4:08pm

      People need to write those responsible for Aurora’s gun laws and lay the blame solidly at the feet of those legislators who created the designated killing field which is what a gun free zone is.

      Report Post »  
    • DannyBoy13
      Posted on July 24, 2012 at 4:45pm

      You don’t get it OBXNED. Get the cops to go on strike to teach those with guns that the American citizens can’t be messed with. That’s the Bloomberg solution…

      Report Post »  
    • DouglassFiller
      Posted on July 24, 2012 at 5:30pm

      I understand the thinking behind a gun-free zone. Unfortunately not every conceal carry person in the world understands that some people are genuinely terrified of someone other than a policeman having a weapon, and some don’t conceal it properly for whatever lame brained reason. People are supposed to feel safe in a movie theater, so to keep the peace they made it a gun free zone. It isn’t safer, but it gives that illusion.

      Report Post » DouglassFiller  
    • Chuck Troupe
      Posted on July 24, 2012 at 6:44pm

      I live in a state that allows CCW – which I do. ALWAYS. For well over a year I frequent a number of restaurants that post the “Gun Free” sign, which I always ignore and nobody ever knows the difference and as long as one of “Satan‘s little helpers don’t come in and try to shoot up the place nobody ever will. But if they do, then I will gladly stand before a judge explaining why I “broke the law.” I keep my piece concealed and I don‘t give a rat’s rear end about the mush-heads who think they “feel” safe with only the police being able to carry.

      Report Post »  
  • Dick Blitskreig
    Posted on July 23, 2012 at 10:11pm

    Were so close to collapse, all we need Is a few more of these shootings and then they’ll (Govt) use It as a excuse to try and take away the guns.
    That’s when It will finally break.

    Report Post » Dick Blitskreig  
    • walkintruth
      Posted on July 24, 2012 at 5:26pm

      They are using all of these crazy people as an excuse to take guns from responsible gun owners. They haven’t thought about making sure places like movie theatre are safe to begin with. This guy was allowed to leave the movie from an exit he should have never been allowed to leave. Then he propped the door open and was allowed to sneak back in. There were no alarms or surveillance to show this guy was up to no good. That would have saved everyone. Lock the doors and don’t let anyone to leave or back in again. It is very simple. But they will try to take our guns and leave us helpless when the crisis comes. Then these laws will only affect the people that abide the law not the ones who break it. This guy broke the law but that law didn’t stop him. So it will always be the bad guys that will end up getting a weapon somehow and the law abiding citizens will be left defenseless.

      Report Post »  
  • tothepoint
    Posted on July 23, 2012 at 10:06pm

    Gun control is how power-hungry governments disarm their citizens and then oppress and murder them.
    56 million people have been murdered by their own governments in the 20th century after countries (such as China and Russia) instituted gun control.

    Report Post »  
    • RebelPatriot
      Posted on July 23, 2012 at 10:30pm

      That pales in comparison to the number of people murdered by crazies with firearms.

      I would say to statistics alone prove it is much more dangerous to not have weapons and allow your government to take them away.

      Report Post »  
  • Thighmaster
    Posted on July 23, 2012 at 10:02pm

    There’s only two sides to the gun issue, you either stand behind yours or you’ll be in front of theirs.

    Report Post » Thighmaster  
  • SCREW-WINDOWS
    Posted on July 23, 2012 at 10:00pm

    If we had strict gun control would the president still confiscate the silverware ?

    Report Post » SCREW-WINDOWS  
  • chips1
    Posted on July 23, 2012 at 9:57pm

    The gun laws that they want to pass were in full effect at the movie theater. It cost 14 lives and 70 wounded. Exactly how many Americans do the liberals want to kill?

    Report Post »  
  • Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
    Posted on July 23, 2012 at 9:47pm

    Gun control…..use both hands.

    Report Post » Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love