Nothing in that story surprises me. So why did the system break down? I mean the scenario is that a gun nut gone wild should be countered by a legitimate gun owner who has his concealed carry permit, surely? Denver certainly has concealed permit legislation. Oh, wait...maybe the gun nut IS a concealed permit holder? So where are these gun totin' heroes? Why weren't they there to save their fellow citizens? If we can't guarantee a legit gun owner will be there to blow the brains out of a gunman with a grudge against society, what the hell is the point of concealed carry? Get real, mate. Only the abolition of gun ownership and severe penalties for owning and carrying sidearms will bring the USA back from the brink. Your society just is not grown up enough to be entrusted with big boy toys.
Cinemark has a policy that only law enforcement officers may carry weapons in their theatres. Stupid policy, but it helped guarantee that the massacre would be successful. And of course legit gun carriers act all the time to deter crimes of violence, but newsclowns like Morgan don't consider that sort of thing newsworthy.
Which, of course, means that the killer was probably well aware of the policy, and therefore knew that the theater would be ideal for his purposes. More on that by Chelsea Schilling HERE. And Vox Day says THIS.
And, if you have any doubts about the efficacy of armed civilians in crime deterrence, I reprint DailyKenn's piece on the subject:
Not one had a gun?
When two armed robbers crashed into a central Florida Internet cafe this week, a 71-year-old man toting a handgun, loaded and ready, sent them to flight. In so doing he may have saved dozens of lives.
When a solitary man burst into a movie theater in Colorado, he opened fire on over a hundred movie goers, picking off those who tried to flee. Twelve were killed, dozens injured; some in the melee and chaos of the moment.
Apparently, not one of the movie-goers was carrying a weapon.
Imagine the outcome had the 71-year-old been at the Aurora, Colorado theater instead of the Florida cafe.
It should be apparent that gun ownership is not the problem.
Gun crime continues to claim lives in nations where toting firearms is illegal.
Two people died in Toronto, Canada last week when a gunman opened fire at a street party. 23 were injured. Canada's repressive gun laws did nothing to dissuade the killer from going on a deadly rampage. Again, had the 71-year-old been in Toronto that night, lives likely would have been saved, and few would have been injured.
It should be noted that self-defense is only one reason to carry -- and use -- a gun.
By firing on would-be robbers and potential killers, the 71-year-old man protected others as well as himself.
Had anyone at the Aurora theater taken the rabid gunman down, a dozen lives may have been saved. It's more than self-protection. It's protecting others.
The next tragic episode of gun violence may well occur in Georgia. A federal appeals court upheld a state law that banned guns in churches. The law also forbids firearms in government buildings, courthouses, prisons and jails, state mental health facilities, bars without the owner's permission, nuclear power plants and polling places and their immediate surroundings.
If a bad guy is looking for a place to do serious damage without serious opposition, he may well make the trek to Georgia.