Use RW nuts to further their financial goals. They don't care squat about guns,. They care about money.

would be just about useless in this scenario. An armored shooter with tear gas in a darkly lit theater. It's fantasy at best, I had a CCW and had I been in this recent tragedy with my girlfriend I'd be heading for the door just like everyone else. There are instances where a CCW can change the outcome, this was not one of them.

Gun culture likes to promote its true believers as valiant heroes fighting against all forms of oppression and tyranny, and the CCW Holders are an elite, sacred order of knights among these heroes.

Thus, "allowing guns everywhere" is presented as a solution to all problems.

I'm just stating the the people who think a CCW holder would have turned the tide in this recent tragedy are delusional.

Despite my part in these... "debates" (I really hate to apply such a noble term to what's going on DU this weekend...) I'm pretty neutral on guns. They're a tool, and nothing more.

What bugs me is the... delusions, as you call it. Not just the delusion that a lone guy with a concealed weapon could have made all the difference (fuck, for all we know, someone HAD a concealed weapon, permit or no - I doubt the theater has a pat-down policy), but also the massive river of delusion and nonsense that it's floating in.

If people could look at their guns like they look at their microwave, instead of fetishizing them as sacred objects and developing this weird, self-sustaining culture that never even tries to come up for air, I think we'd all be a hell of a lot better off, regardless of your position on owning, carrying, or whatever.

Some people seem to think if someone straps on a gun they become every action hero they've ever seen on the big screen. A gun is a tool, a necessary one, but it's not a panacea for all of life's problems.

I don't know what you guys are bitching about. You pretty much had your way here:

1. It was a gun-free zone.
2. Apparently nobody else was carrying

12 people died and 50 injured. I'm not seeing a success under these gun-free zone conditions.

Ban guns outright?

1. Banning drugs hasn't worked in the least (even get into prisons)
2. Plenty of corrupt cops and they own guns.

When seconds count, cops are only minutes away.

... Dealing with Occupy protesters instead of dealing with real crimes.

arm everyone, circular firing squad.

First of all in situations like this people are usually getting down to the ground and quickly
funnelling out. A trained gunman would have a chance of fighting back.

These laws take away all sorts of people who could have helped including:

1. Off duty military
2. Ex military
3. retired cops
4. And many gun owners have taken lessons.

Do you see criminal gunmen robbing CROWDED gun shops? Actually it has happened and it turned out terrible for the
criminal.

You left one out. Why was it so easy for this guy to arm himself as if he was in a war zone?

He was stopped from practicing at a Gun Range because one alert individual determined he might not be all there. Yet he had no problem purchasing all those weapons, legally in this country.

You can keep on trying to blame:

1) The Movie Theater for its policies but they did their part to ensure the safety of those patrons.

It is the free-for-all laws regarding the availability of guns that undermines the rest of society who do the right thing. So bad choice of talking point. We are not buying it.

A lunatic managed to get enough weapons with zero problem in this country to kill and wound dozens of innocent people with apparent problem. That is NOT the fault of the Movie Theater or 'Gun Grabbers' or whoever else you try to shift the blame to.

Why was it so easy? Because he never had a criminal record. A gun range is just a gun range. The owner who got those messages is by no means an authority figure of any kind. I've had times when I'm not all there and people can make rash judgement calls. My bosses at work thought I was on drugs (friend told me). I was just tired from waking up early. If that's all it takes then do I need everyone who has known me to be interviewed before I purchase a car or a knife (look up UK knife homicides)?

Please convince me that banning guns or otherwise would have stopped this guy from getting guns. Our government tries to ban things ALL the time. It simply doesn't work. The criminals always break the law and get them.

In fact if we banned guns a few things would happen based on what is happening with our drug ban.

1. Gun prices would skyrocket because they are illegal. (I know this sounds awesome to you, but hold on)

2. Cartels around the world would see an amazing profit potential shipping in illegal guns and selling as many as possible.

3. Entire new criminal organizations would be created and expanded thus giving them more money and power.

4. Criminals in order to afford them would commit MORE crimes in order to afford the HIGHER priced guns. This is why the drug ban is so terrible and hurts far more people who aren't involved at all.

If legal "Drug A" costs $10, I have to do $10 worth of crime. If "Drug A" is illegal and now costs $100, I have to do $100 worth of crime (more people hurt). This is what would happen if we ban guns.

We can't police 12,000 miles of borders and coastlines. There are precision machine tools all around us, so criminals will always be able to make guns and ammunition with ease. Police in DC seize home-made guns about 1 in 5 times.

weapons of any kind out of the hands of people who suffer from mental illnesses that cause them to have violent episodes.

I don't know the answers, but would start with creating, because we do not have one, the best mental health care system in the world.

It would require:

1. An amazing surveillance grid across America. Video cameras perched along the streets, internet taps, cell phone taps..etc. London is a good example of a very robust camera grid. This crazy guy had NO background, so we're all going to be watched carefully.

2. There seems to be talks of TSA like agents at movie theaters, malls...any place where these shootings occur. After Columbine we have metal detector screenings and agents at many schools now. We have drug sniffing dogs running down the school halls.

Mental health is a tricky one. It's rife with corruption. It's not based on the scientific method. Unlike medical conditions/diseases which are discovered and proven as medical conditions (through biopsy, test, physical abnormality) psychiatric disorders are literally voted into existence by a show of hands. More disturbing is that the psychiatrists voting on the new disorders are frequently being paid by the pharmaceutical companies which manufacture the drugs for these disorders. And what the hell can the patient do? Say he's not crazy? Heh, well that's actually what a crazy person would say.

http://www.mental-health-abuse.org/massiveFraud11.html

So if you want a police state and no privacy, then sure. Or we can take responsibility for protecting ourselves. Just like we need to take responsibility with alcohol and driving. Or we could try banning alcohol and see if the 2nd time is the charm.

Seems like you are not looking for solutions to save lives, but rather to make excuses for why nothing should or could be done.

And that is part of the problem, right there.