Aurora Shooting – We’ve Seen This Before

Great Op-Ed from Roger Ebert in the NY Times.

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.

I was sitting in a Chicago bar one night with my friend McHugh when a guy from down the street came in and let us see that he was packing heat.

“Why do you need to carry a gun?” McHugh asked him.

“I live in a dangerous neighborhood.”

“It would be safer if you moved.”

I have a gun. I will be getting rid of it as soon as possible. This is terrible.

via Aurora Shooting – We’ve Seen This Before –

Author: Jake Spurlock

Jake is a geek, designer, HTML+CSS lover. Taker of photos, and sometimes skiing and biking... He spends his time day dreaming new WordPress themes and camping with the Boy Scouts. For some random posts, check out the link blog.

4 thoughts on “Aurora Shooting – We’ve Seen This Before”

    1. I don’t think it would ever be used in a violent shooting. What I do think is that I wouldn’t ever want to contribute to an act of violence. Either directly or indirectly.

  1. Give your gun to me. I won’t use it to shoot innocent people. The logic in this op-ed is terrible. The fact that no one shot back doesn’t in any way break down the argument that someone COULD have saved lives had they shot back. The movie theater had a “no-guns” policy. The fact that no one shot back proves that law abiding citizens obey the law. Criminals do not. And the notion that everyone who lives in a dangerous neighborhood move just isn’t practical. Crime happens in bad neighborhoods and good neighborhoods. And with so many people out of work right now do you expect them to spend the money to move somewhere else simply to be unemployed in a “safe” neighborhood they can’t afford. Perhaps many of the “safe” neighborhoods are safe because the general population carry firearms and use them to defend themselves against violent attackers.

    1. Rob, if you want to pick it up, I’d be happy to give it to you. What I didn’t convey in my post above, but what I will share here is that I have nothing against gun ownership, or 2nd ammedment rights. I don’t think that owning a gun is the problem. What I think is that for me, I don’t need a gun. And I am getting rid of it. I like shooting guns, and I will continue to use them in a responsible manner, but I won’t keep one in my house.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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