Pages

Monday, July 23, 2012

James Holmes's A-47: Who Needs Gun Control?

       What we seem to be getting a lot of is that we must do whatever it takes to get to the root of the Columbine Syndrome, however, gun control is not the answer.

       On the one hand we hear that there must be no "rush to judgment" that blames guns, on the other hand they at the same time rule out even asking the kind of questions that Mayor Mike Bloomberg brought up in the tragedy's direct aftermath.

       So it that Colorado Governor John Hickelooper can make this strong statement that:

       "even if Aurora shooting suspect James Holmes did not have access to guns, he would have found a way to create “horror.”

    “This wasn’t a Colorado problem. This is a human problem,” Hickenlooper said. “Even if he didn’t have access to guns, this guy was diabolical…he would have found explosives. He would have found something…he would have done something to create this horror.”

       http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/gov-john-hickenlooper-james-holmes-would-have-created-horror-without-guns/



       The Governor is certainly a little too categorical about this. I mean the AK-47 that he used to shoot 71 people wasn't even legal until the ban on it was allowed to lapse back in 2004 by the Republican Congress and George W. Bush.

       I'm sorry it's all about motive, means, and opportunity. If that AK-47 was not available his means and opportunity would have been lessened. Understand, there is no other way to put a stop to Columbine style killings which have become a part of national life.

      Mr. Hickelooper is one of those who is arguing that the answer is that we should be more watchful to the signs of mental illness. This is a quite erroneous idea that we can all be deputised as mental health experts. In reality, Holmes had seemed entirely normal. Not everyone who is a budding psycho killer has it written on his face.

     Simple appearance is pretty unreliable. Again, I feel that I have to say it in the environment we're in where you can't voice the mildest concern without being accused of wanting to take everyone's guns away, I'm not for a gun ban or anything close to it.

    As even Bill Kristol says it's absurd that we can't rule out the Holmes of the world from buying enough explosives to destroy half a block and and AK-47. Obviously some mild gun control is in order. What's also amazing about his case, is how quickly Holmes was able to purchase his weapons. There has to be some kind of meaningful waiting period.

   The politics are not very good for this right now it seems with the NRA just recently able to have the Attorney General for the first time in U.S. history held in contempt based on an absurd conspiracy theory. But some kind of mild, intelligent gun control is the only way to reduce the odds of this happening again.
      

3 comments:

  1. As someone who has been shooting avidly for most of my life, I understand the dangers that surround firearms and their use. Safety is always the first priority no matter the given situation. However, over time it has become more and more clear that more comprehensive screenings for firearms is needed.  Making the process more comprehensive might deter your average idiot who is in a bad mood, wants to get a gun, and wants to use that gun to shoot someone. But let's not kid ourselves: it isn't likely to decrease occurrences like this. There are people out there (and I’m surprised I haven’t seen more people make this connection considering what movie he did this in) who "just want to watch the world burn." You can put all the obstacles you want in front of someone like this and they will inevitably acquire the means to kill. Even if they have to make it themselves. It seems obvious that this individual, James Holmes, was sadistic on such a level that he led a seemingly normal life just so he could obtain the firearms, ammunition, explosive materials, trigger mechanisms, chemical weapons, body-armor, and the knowledge needed to use all of these things to strike exactly when, where, and how he wanted. He clearly isn't just some loser who "snapped." I bet he spent months, possibly over a year, planning this. Sadly, there are people like this out there and the fact of the matter is that lethal technology exists. Even if you could manage take all the guns and so forth away, you cannot take away the knowledge of how to create it, or the ability to engineer new and unexpected ways to kill each other. Gun control is not the issue; why so many people choose mass murder as their life achievement--that is the issue.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, Anon, you make some fair points. Again, I'm not proposing taking away responsible gun owners' guns. You certainlty seem to fit that bill.

    My concern is that assault weapons are so accessible to a nut job like Holmes.

    You may be right that psychopaths will find their ways I'm not doubting that.

    Still, as you seem to agree, you have to at least make it a little harder for them by pursing common sense gun control.

    What I never get is why the NRA pursues such a scorched earth policy. It's almost like they imagine there are two "equlibrium points" in society-as they put in in economics-where you can either have a society wher there are absolutley no regulations, waiting lists or checks on how many and what kinds of weapons yoou can acquire or we'll fall down the "slippery slope" and the next thing you know we'll be Japan or Sweden which have very low gun ownership-though we could point out very low crime rates.

    It's this all or nothing strategy I don't get.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You also make a good point about Holmes. What was interesting was this piece about him being an "unuusally bad intern."

    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0723/Colorado-shooting-suspect-James-Holmes-was-an-unusually-bad-intern

    The guy he worked for back in 2006 concluded Holmes actually knew very little about neuroscience. His brilliance was more superficial than real.

    His summer internship at the Salk Institute in La Jolla, California, in 2006 might have been impressive on paper, but his supervisor described him in an interview as "an unusually bad intern."

    John Jacobson, supervisor of the neurobiology lab at Salk, said he asked Holmes to create several online demonstrations of the lab's work on temporal perceptions. Jacobson said he repeatedly tried to explain to Holmes exactly how to do the computer programming, but Holmes kept insisting on a different approach -- one that did not work.

    "He was really, oddly, stubborn," Jacobson said.

    "Jacobson said he made a point of sitting down to lunch with Holmes at least a half-dozen times, trying to draw him out and encourage him, but found it impossible to make conversation. "He was extremely shy," he said. "It was really hard for him to say anything. You had to ask yes or no questions."

    "At the end of the summer, Holmes had to make a presentation to his fellow interns about the work. A video, widely circulated online since the shooting, shows him smiling shyly and talking with some confidence."

    "But Jacobson said he spent an entire day going over that presentation with Holmes and never got the sense that he understood any of the basic science."

    "He was very undistinguished," Jacobson said


    So your theory that he was just faking it seems like it may be right. Holmes' interest in neuro science may have been access to materials for expolosions, etc.

    ReplyDelete