.

Batman Shootings: What Is the Biggest Issue for You?

Will the mayhem at the Batman premiere in Aurora, Colorado, make us rethink some social issues - like guns, movie violence and event terrorist opportunities?

One gunman and one crowded theater. At least 12 dead and dozens injured, several seriously. For the premiere of a movie that earned a PG-13 rating despite what more than one reviewer has called its "incredible violence."

Americans awoke Friday morning to live news coming from Aurora, Colo., where a young gunman reportedly wearing a gas mask and a bulletproof vest allegedly opened fire during a midnight showing of Batman: The Dark Knight Rises.

The movie expected to gross $200 million this weekend. It is playing locally at the Rohnert Park Stadium 16.

At this point, 12 dead and 50 wounded are the number of casualties being reported. As information become available the figures could change up or down. But no matter what the final numbers are, there is one definitive: It's a tragedy.

The Friday morning massacre at the Century 16 in Aurora took place 15 miles and 13 years from Columbine High, where 12 students and one adult were killed by two high school seniors on April 20, 1999.

At the theater, the suspect is identified as James Holmes, 24, of San Diego. He was a graduate student in the neuroscience program at the University of Colorado Medical School campus in Aurora.

In the movie theater last night, he had two handguns, a shotgun and an assault rifle, according to press reports. 

It’s the kind of tragedy that can open up wounds in every region in America. The incident Friday morning is likely to start at least one discussion, and probably several of them.

Should metal detectors become as standard as popcorn machines at movie theaters?

Should gun control laws be revisited?

Should the influence of movie violence be examined?

Will there be no more dress-up at movie theaters, which apparently allowed the Aurora gunman to enter with a handgun, a rifle, a gas canister and a gas mask?

We've listed several of these in the poll below, but you can use the comments to weigh in on the big question: What do you think is the biggest issue in this latest tragedy? 

Like us on Facebook | Follow us on Twitter | Sign up for our daily newsletter

pdf July 26, 2012 at 05:46 PM
Ambrose...Exactly my sentiments. The constitution has changed with the times (ie. women's right to vote...). Let's take a look at the constitution and revisit some laws that don't apply to this day and age. Remember when the constitution was written and why.
Tom July 27, 2012 at 03:04 AM
Yes they do pdf, as well as with knives, cars and planes, and as long as that evil exsists in our world, I believe it's everyones right to have the ability to defend themselves against such evil.
Doug Strickland July 29, 2012 at 03:39 PM
If we venture into a debate about guns, and what we attempt to define as "gun control", the it should be a broader discussion that includes the review of the efficacy of concealed carry laws. Colorado IS a concealed carry state, meaning if you own a gun in Colorado, you can carry it with you for personal protection. This is purported to lower massacre-scaled tragedies, since someone ELSE has a gun, and could "fight back". So why didn't this happen? There is no way to eliminate guns in our world. It's like unringing a bell. You can't. And as long as there are ways to hurt and kill others, there will be others hurt and killed. If we didn't have guns, this conversation would probably be about how we are going to control whatever it was that people are using to hurt each other. Humans are violent, many of them, and they will find ways to hurt people. Period.
Doug Strickland July 29, 2012 at 03:50 PM
Perhaps more importantly is how the Amendment does not define Who the people are protecting themselves from. This was addressed by the Supreme Court in v. Heller, defining that you don't need to be part of an army to arm yourself for protection. So while you toy with the definition of militia, understand that at the time of the Constitutions creation, the people had no laws against the possession of guns. It was considered an 'inherent right'. The constitution referred to those regular people forming together to protect this new thing - the country. It did not obviate existing law, nor did it remove any inherent rights of individuals to protect themselves.
Doug Strickland July 29, 2012 at 03:58 PM
Wait, WHAT?! Are you actually suggesting rounding up the mentally ill and putting them in forced "treatment?! The former Soviet Union called - they want their Health Minister back... Instead of rounding up the "sick" why not behave more like good people, and care for our brothers and sisters well being. If I see a friend is having problems, guide them to better choices. If I sense my friend is losing it, take him to where she can get help. Why do we need to rely on the government to do the right thing?!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »