Toronto To Aurora, Close The Circle of Fire
John Cole, The Scranton Times-Tribune
Roger Ebert on the shootings in Aurora:
Should this young man — whose nature was apparently so obvious to his mother that, when a ABC News reporter called, she said “You have the right person” — have been able to buy guns, ammunition and explosives? The gun lobby will say yes. And the endless gun control debate will begin again, and the lobbyists of the National Rifle Association will go to work, and the op-ed thinkers will have their usual thoughts, and the right wing will issue alarms, and nothing will change. And there will be another mass murder. 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.
With life so fragile, we choose to take the risk:
Immediately after a shooting last month in the food court of the Eaton Centre mall in Toronto, a young woman named Jessica Ghawi posted a blog entry. Three minutes before a gunman opened fire, she had been seated at the exact place he fired from.
“I was shown how fragile life was,” she wrote. “I saw the terror on bystanders’ faces. I saw the victims of a senseless crime. I saw lives change. I was reminded that we don’t know when or where our time on Earth will end. When or where we will breathe our last breath.”
This same woman was one of the fatalities at the midnight screening in Aurora. The circle of madness is closing.
Related: Could a Brave Citizen With a Concealed Weapon Have Prevented the Aurora Shootings?
LEGAL NOTICE ON CARTOON: The copyrighted cartoon above is licensed to run on TMV. Reproduction elsewhere without licensing is strictly prohibited. See great cartoons by all the top political cartoonists at http://cagle.com. To license this cartoon for your own site, visit http://politicalcartoons.com
Share This
Thanks Joe,
For the post and for the link to Roger Ebert’s Op-Ed.
For those who don’t follow the link here’s an additional quote that should be read by all sides of the gun issue:
Roger Ebert is a ‘man of all seasons‘ who makes sense in many worlds where sense is often just the ‘soup du jour.’
Pro-gun forces simply go too far. There is no need for the average citizen to own an assault weapon. There is no need for the average citizen to own body armor. There is no need for the average citizen to own tear gas.
These are items thiat are useless for self-defense. These are items that are useless for hunting. There are only two reasons to own these items: collecting and committing murder, armed robbery, terrorism, and other high-impact crimes.
Keep the right to personal firearms. But restrict the weapons and gear whose only purpose is committing acts of violence on a large scale. And to hell with the fetishists.
What the gun lobby won’t tell you is that controls are in place and working. Citizen can own and shoot automatic weapons like tommy guns and fully automatic weapons.
http://www.ehow.com/how_4454981_buy-automatic-weapon.html
If some fool reaaly wants an assault weapon make them apply for a ATF Form 4 (5320.4).
rudi… from what I’ve read so far, this Holmes guy didn’t have an automatic weapon. What everybody casually refers to as an “assault” weapon is actually a semiautomatic — meaning the weapon fires a single bullet each time the trigger is pulled.
Not saying I disagree with calls to tighten things up. But I think the distinctions and definitions matter. Part of the reason the NRA / gun lobby is able to push back is because of the misuse of terminology.
Semis are the most common technology these days. The term applies to pretty much anything with a “clip” (which holds more then one bullet and automatically places another into the chamber after firing).
Most handguns are semi. (Revolvers are seen as outdated.)
Cowardly politicians and foolish citizens are as responsible as anyone. There have always been crazy people but there hasn’t always been such easy access to such dangerous weapons.
My point was to the misconception that fully automatic weapons are BANNED in the US, they’re not. The Clinton’s Assault Weapons ban made them illegal, until the wingnuts allowed that to EXPIRE. While not a gun nut, an AK-47 is more dangerous and deadly when operated in semi-automatic mode compared to full auto. In full auto the gun sprays and the kick/recoil takes the weapon away from the intended target.
DDuck should be happy that shotguns used in hunting use plugs to limit shells in a magazine/tube for hunting. No such luck for the Colorado victims…
Ah! Thanks rudi for the clarification! I had to go run that down — was misinformed.
Indeed, controls on the full autos are apparently working. I don’t remember any crimes like this being committed with one (though I am often wrong so open as ever to enlightenment…).
Actually, the only times I can think of them being used at all was during prohibition (or maybe Bonnie and Clyde era?), and even that thought might very well be a product of many movies I’ve seen.
Did they come under strict regulation as a prophylactic measure? Or following a number of crimes that have been happily squashed?
This is interesting on gun use for the Deadliest U.S. Shootings Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/deadliest-us-shootings/
@Poli
The most recent time auto weapons were used was in California. These were semi auto’s modified to work as auto.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout
Interesting link sparrow. The graphics accompanying each description underscore why it is that the actual weapon is not the main problem.
rudi — I’d read about the CA case, and then didn’t include it mentally… primarily because they modified. And to be perfectly honest, I don’t see any way we, as a society, are going to be able to prevent that type of thing. Ever.
I think that the term Assault Weapon has been defined by both sides in different way to make their point. I think we can all agree on what an Assault weapon is. One designed for use in combat against other humans. Semi-auto, large clips, easily reloaded. One designed for maximum rate of fire in the minimum time. Say, enough to kill 12 people and wound 50 more in just a few minutes. People can hash out specifics as to # rounds, size of clips and barrels, etc… but like porn, we know one when we see one.
Which isn’t to say that I think we need a slew of legislation as a result of this nut. I really hate when we decide to fix things by regulating the entire population because of a small percentage of whackjobs. I bet if Samuel Williams was sitting in that movie theatre and shot the shooter we’d be having an entire different conversation about how we NEED to arm our civilians. When in reality what we are trying to do now is make sense out of an insane and senseless act. If only we’d banned weapons then this wouldn’t have happened. If only there had been someone in the audience who had their own gun. If only we didn’t idolize violence in this country. This tragedy is the result of a madman. Something you hope you never come across, being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Its like a lightning strike, or a tornado, or a car crash or a plane falling from the sky. Blaming ourselves for the mentally unstable and trying to make our normally orderly world come back by saying someone screwed up is a natural reaction, but lets not confuse it with something that is more than a gut instinct with dealing with a horrible tragedy.
More info on the guns used….
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/365428/20120720/kalashnikov-colorado.htm
It was stated by the Police that the A15, which is essentially a M16 had 100 magazine… he had bought 6,000 rounds…
The Glocks have clips of 16 to 33…
This killer had at least 130 to 166 with these three guns before he had to reload…
That is insane for a twenty something citizen student to be able to purchase…
The A15 has a horrid history around the world… it is a weapon of choice for some of the greatest thugs on this planet….
Get rid of it….
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/365428/20120720/kalashnikov-colorado.htm
” Get rid of it for everyone except military and police… and have very strict regulations on how those guns are retired…
This article says the A15 used in this assault weapon could get off a round each second….
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/365289/20120720/colorado-shooting-aurora-guns-gun-laws.htm
Agree with sparrow totally. There is no good reason for citizens to own weapons that are capable of inflicting this much damage on other people in such a short amount of time. Why don’t we as a society recognize this abvious reality? Are we complete morons? Apparently so.
It’s obvious that many are not gun people and from some of the comments even some who think they are are less knowledgeable than they believe. The ar15 isn’t a particularly powerful or dangerous weapon. The round it fires is small caliber but high velocity and most of the damage comes from the ballistics not the inherent power of the round. the civilian counterpart .223, which is almost interchangeable, is considered a varmint round and unsuitable for large game. The military chose the m16 for other reasons that have nothing to do with it’s power and in truth there is a growing segment that believes it is under powered. Any rifle with a removable mag will have available mags of different capacities. Several people here have indicated they believe sport shooting is a proper use of firearms, well larger mags make it easier and increase the enjoyment. One of the most popular guns in the US is the ruger mini 14. It is usually chambered in .223 and is considered a good “ranch” and sporting gun. This gun would never be covered by any ban and it would be hard to say it is any less deadly. Heck since the military took other considerations into account like weight, maint, and a host of other factors there are many sporting firearms that are much more powerful so why ban the AR15. Do we think a killer will say “Well since I can’t buy the scary looking gun i guess I won’t bother”? This is an example of legislation that is for form not function. It would do nothing to make anyone any safer but would restrict peoples choises.
The ar15 isn’t a particularly powerful or dangerous weapon.
Nice try, but why don’t you include actual balaSTICS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.40_S%26W
155 gr (10.0 g) 1,205 ft/s 500 ft·lbf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.223_Remington
60 gr (3.9 g) 3,160 ft/s 1,330 ft·lbf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56x45mm_NATO
4.1 g (63 gr) 3,070 ft/s 1,325 ft·lbf
The varmint rifle and AR-15 have almost 3X the energy of the .40 Glock.
Just for target practice and tearing thru flesh and walls.
Ellis, you’re partly right but your conclusions are wanting. The .223 is indeed a popular varmint cartridge (flat shooting), especially when chambered in a bolt action rifle (greater accuracy), but it was in fact designed for ease of killing humans based on low recoil, high velocity, and high capacity. It excels in that arena, which is exactly why the round is so popular among civilians who are enamored of assault type weapons. Btw, the Ruger you mention used to also be chambered in 7.62×39mm, which is the round the AK-47 was chambered for, a cartridge that has largely been replaced in Russia by the 5.45×39mm, which is lighter and higher velocity (like the .223) This allows a soldier to carry more ammunition for the same weight, and makes for lower recoil, favouring light weight arms design, thus automatic fire and higher accuracy. Your focus on the actual power of the .223 cartridge misses the point about why it’s so deadly in military situations.