a comment was deleted here for violating terms of service. keep it civil, folks.

i've deleted a comment here that provided incorrect information on the man arrested in connection with the shooting. read more here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/20/colorado-shooting-news-conference_n_1690270.html

Although my post wasn't removed, I must express my surprise that some of the mild exchanges have been characterized as worthy of being deleted - while much more vicious attacks still remain (as still in the Brecksville levy comments).
Maybe the comments would have remained if they had been more properly worded to meet acceptable standards, such as, "the shooter is SUSPECTED by some to have ties to the occupy group". And then the other person could have said "oh my, I don't think so. I did not see or hear THAT, so it can't be true."

Your comment is just SO inappropriate that words fail me.

John-
Please listen to Mitt's comments made earlier this afternoon. They really were wonderful and summarize how we all should be feeling. It's too bad that you can't put politics aside and give the man credit for what he said. And, if you also have a problem with my second comment, then you do not know what was deleted.

Dear, I was commenting on the fact that YOU could not put politics aside. Everything was fine until your last sentence where you were baiting people to get into an political argument.

Looks like you got baited, John. Nice job.

i've deleted a comment here for violating terms of use. no name-calling, people.

Your comment is also very inappropriate and just wrong. I'm embarrassed for you.

You and Lyn need to draw straws as to who should remain in the kitchen and OFF the internet. The "loser" can work on cleaning the other rooms.

Sad that people act like this... Thanks Melissa & Rachel

CRAZY people out there Mr. Fisher... this thread proves it!

Mr. Ed Fisher, I find that I agree with you almost 100% of the time.

(eye roll)

crazy talk...

Yes, surely crossfire in a darkened theatre would have saved many lives.

@William, doing nothing while some lunatic decides your fate is crazy. How many lives could have been saved by someone standing up to this pos, instead of running and fleeing the scene...

@Jessica. Do you know how many lives were lost? What if I was next to him, who was next to you, would you feel any differently if I stopped him first, before he got to you??? We just don't shoot at anything, we do take our training very seriously, unlike these people.Who just go in guns blazing.

Yes, I am sure that possessing a concealed carry permit is the same as any military or police training on how to minimize casualties in a open fire crisis situation. Save your heroic fantasies for someone who might believe them.

Actually, i was military, Vietnam. Jessica, I could have been your best friend in a situation like this. Our motto was, 'better to walk out alive, than be carried out by 6. And I still train and learn to this day, but that wont help you survive.

Oh and JJS, I see you are possibly from Kent. Are you old enough to remember the massacre at KSU. I recall they were military, too, "in an open fire crisis situation", on unarmed students, but YOU don't want to go there, now do you?

You are missing the point here, Steve. While you yourself might possess oodles of specialized training that would enable you to single-handedly take out an erratic target in a dark room filled with innocent bystanders, the average person with a concealed carry permit likely does not. Someone trying to act a hero would probably have ended up getting more people killed and injured. Trying to ask me what I would do in this situation if you were there with your uber skills is moot because I wasn't there and neither were you. It agitates me that there are people who equate being able to carry a concealed weapon with fantasy heroics, this isn't the wild west, you aren't likely to be set upon by a pack of bandits, you are most likely to be in an urban scene with a lot of innocent bystanders when you whip out your 'equalizer.'

No, I am not old enough to remember May 4th but having grown up here, I can't get away from it. I don't know what your lightly veiled threat was intended to do, by all means, go for it, it has absolutely nothing at all to do with a single shooter in a crowded movie theatre during opening night of an anticipated film but I am sure you can draw all sorts of parallels. The National Guard is not, nor have they EVER been trained to handle a riot situation, that is the job of the State Highway Patrol. I have personally watched troopers training for such situations day after day when I worked next door to their training center in Columbus. Not sure where you were going with that statement, but feel free to carry on with your tangent.

@Steve

I served in the military as well during the height of the second war in Iraq. I'm unclear as to how your having served in Vietnam qualifies you to be tactically sure about an urban combat theater with the high probability of collateral damage.

The last time I checked Vietnam was a jungle and that conflict relied heavily on tactics which were focused on routing large numbers of enemy troops coupled with guerrilla-like warfare.

Even had someone had a weapon the effects of tear gas as you may or may not know are almost immediate. I know this because I stood in a room full of it twice a month. Without the proper breathing apparatus sight is compromised in seconds followed by almost immediate respiratory involvement.

Please clarify how someone having a CCP would have in anyway made this situation better.

If you are feeling generous please clarify how your completely unrelated combat training in Vietnam (drafted?) is in anyway relevant to this(rather than just pulling the military card to gain points in a pointless argument based on a insane statement).

Sorry JJS, but the national guard IS a military unit, trained for everything from riot control to explosives. Please get your facts straight before dissing someone who knows better.

Absolutely, Steve.

It's always good to have an gun in the hands of the good guys.

Pad, although you asked the question of Steve, I'll go ahead and answer it.

If someone had a CCW permit and was able to return fire, suddenly the focus of the bad guy (called that just to make sure you know who I'm talking about) would likely be on the person trying to shoot him and not the unarmed people running for the door.

While it may have been a losing battle, someone with a CCW would divert the gunman's attention, allow more innocents to escape, change the focus of the bad guy, and possibly end the entire encounter *BEFORE* anyone else was hurt or killed, thereby minimizing losses.

Would you say having fewer victims would have made this situation better?
There's your answer.

Jessica Johnson Salamon - Steve is correct about the National Guard. Let's be clear since you brought up May 4th and the context in which it occurred. The National Guard had just spent weeks due to a Teamster's strike protecting the highways from teamsters throwing concrete blocks onto independant truckers. I saw the machine gunned armed jeeps on every overpass going into Akron. They were then re-deployed due to the destruction in downtown Kent by the "unarmed" students rioting. This coupled with the burning of the ROTC building where these same students were cutting fire hoses and attacking firemen trying to do their jobs. As Steve said, know your facts before posting.

Steve with his crazy CCW-talk, which has been typical of the likes of you with every single tragedy: to spew your agenda-filled stupidity without looking at the facts.

I don't care that you were in the military. There were a few other people in the military in the theater that were victims, including one that is (as I type this) still missing. Which just adds further stupidity and irrelevancy to your comments.

Since you "if someone had a gun" spewers have pretty much ignored FACTS here, this guy decided to launch two tear gas canisters BEFORE he opened fire. Let me also remind you that the theater was also dark. So, you have a dark theater with 2 gas canisters further adding to EVERYONE'S impaired vision.

Then, add confusion of EVERYONE in the SOLD OUT theater and everyone running for safety.

But, hey, don't let common sense or facts get in the way or your clueless, agenda-filled stupidity. Derp.

The "if's" IF someone was packing or not is irrelevant here.

And I highly doubt most of the "if someone had a CCW" have ever been in a situation such as this where something like this -- at a location you least expect in AND with the surrounding.
AND if you're with someone (say your family) and you're more worried about putting your concealed carry to use, then that speaks volumes about YOU that you're more worried about your gun than getting your family members and you to safety FIRST.

The fact of the matter is, all of these Paul Kersey-wannabe online tough guys who act as if a CCW permit holder would've made a difference would've acted in the same fashion everyone else in the theater did -- and that's running for safety. And yeah, they could've made a difference -- adding to the casualties by shooting innocent people in all of the chaos (another factor the "if someone had a gun" spewers never consider).

Now, get back to watching the Death Wish marathon and your fantasy world.

@Earl

Have you ever had a gun pointed at you? I have. It's not exactly a moment of clarity. It's something you really can't be trained for. How can you be so certain that some random person with a CCW would have reacted properly? How can you be so certain they wouldn't have shot other innocent bystanders?

@Steve

You clearly know very little about the National Guard. They have units just like any other military organization who are trained to do specific jobs. You make out like every cook in the National Guard is riot trained and that is simply not true.

P.S. You still haven't answered me.

Given the choice if I was in that theater, I would have preferred someone to have had a concealed gun. I'd rather take my chances with a semi or nonprofessional, than be a sitting duck. And, the person with the concealed weapon would have had the perfect opportunity to use his own weapon when that idiot was reloading
Are people forgetting Flight 93 that crashed on 9/11 near Shanksville? They risked and lost their lives to save others.

@Pad, you want a reply! I will not compare my time spent in the military VS yours, althought you did bring up the cook issue, were you one? All wars are bad, get over it. But one thing I learned was to help my fellow boys, WE were a unit, is that simple enough for you? No good outcome is ever pointless as you stated. That was not an insane statement, that was a what / if? Get it yet!!! Learn to read and digest what was written, and be happy that there are people out their willing to risk their lives for the good of others.

@Steve

For someone that doesn't want to compare service records you were certainly ready and willing to try and take a stab at mine.

No, I wasn't a cook. I was a 4404 Combat Medic in the 10th Regiment where I served on the Advance Party for Romeo Battery.

I'm quite capable of reading and digesting what I took in, but the issue here isn't my service record, my reading comprehension abilities or you trying to deflect and not answer my questions.

The issue in this particular comment is that you seem to believe that a random person with a gun in a room full of tear gas and confusion would have somehow helped the situation rather than made it worse.

As for pointless. This argument is entirely the definition of pointless. It is the result of a Gung Ho gun owner suggesting that more small arms fire in the midst of chaos would somehow have made things better rather than worse.

I can see from your stubborn refusal to accept or address the facts of the situation that continued conversation with you on this point is going to be fruitless. I can only hope that someone else has the words which will convince you to examine the situation from a logical point of view rather than a Dirty Harry point of view.

@Pad- There is no Dirty Harry here, and it was never insinuated as such, and it was you who brought up the cooks. And I did answer you, but YOU refuse to read my comments in full. Here is a comment for you, as a medic, you patch them up, me, I brought them out of harms way, whatever it took, to get them to you. No need to reply.

Steve you are right. It is always better to take a stand. There are so many people who are afraid to stand up and be counted, to stand up and fight. I would much rather try something and fail, then try nothing and hope for the best.

I'd guess the short answer is:
Because the republicans had to put up with eight years of the libs acting the exact same way.

Guess turnabout is fair play, right?

Thanks Patrick

Thanks Mr. Giusto!

Exactly!

And everyone wonders how this guy could get to the point of snapping--maybe he was on these boards for a while...

Amen to that Jennifer! This carnal world thrives on Anger. From Shootings to comments on this article. Get a grip and then stay on the point.

David,
you are exactly right.

I don't see any 'anger' against CCW holders (perhaps you need to read things a little slower so you comprehend). What I see is "anger" at those who waste no time with stories like this stating the typical "if someone else had a gun."

They weren't there, nor have they been in a situation like this before. Perhaps people there did have a gun. But, they wanted to get the heck out of there rather than trying to be a hero and POSSIBLY endangering further lives.

And, what these "if someone had a gun" people ALSO seem to forget (or ignore) is this guy launched 2 canisters of tear gun FIRST in a DARK theater and was protected from head on down (literally) -- he had a helmet, throat guard, groin protector and a vest. So, it was obvious this guy was ready for those who had a gun.

So, there's no "anger" against CCW holders. It's "anger" at the morons who waste no time spewing their "if someone had a gun" ignorance.

@ I.M. Wright, U. R. wrong. All I did was offer up a scenario, what if. Please do not call US morons, just because YOU would have run for the exits. That to me is ignorance, and self serving, but YOU knew that already. Look whose spewing now...

If you were reading anger against CCP holders or National Guard personnel in my posts, then you indeed need to reread. I never said anything disparaging about the National Guard and my comments were directed at a specific CCP holder with a hero fantasy. I'm done with this conversation now since it's spiraling quickly. Now we have the holy grail of 9/11 brought in, I expect the next step will be to compare someone to Hitler.

@Anita--The NRA or the GOP had nothing to do with this killing spree by a very intelligent person, he could have used dynamite or grenades instead of guns. Just as easy to get or make. Want reform, automatic death sentence after being found guilty of crimes. No 20 and out bye the Judge, per the law. People play the system every day because they know they can get away with it. The only people getting off their couches right now are cleaning and loading their guns. that's reform. Stand your ground...be safe out there.

Anita-
Just yesterday, a deleted comment of yours on this very article included, word for word, the following "Very sad. And Tom, what does Politics have to do with this?".

There are over 70 million gun owners that killed no one yesterday. To fight for your life and the life of your loved ones is not a super human trait. It’s your duty!

Anita-
However, I do agree with most of what you said!

Anita, you just don't get it. You are bringing politics into this disaster, fueling the fire against the NRA and GOP, which clearly had nothing to do with this. So only 'WACKOS' should have arms? I know many high powered Dem's that carry arms and support those that do in a respective way. More people will be killed by cars than crazys with guns, so should we ban cars???? Thats politics.

I don't disagree with you, Ed. But in this case, it appears (so far) that this guy had no criminal record. If that proves to be the case, and all his weapons and ammo were legally obtained, then he was no criminal until he walked in and pulled the trigger and I am left wondering how this guy could have been stopped.

@Steve - I think justice needs to be swift for *everyone* and our appellate system needs to be allowed to run its course (although admittedly, this particular case seems pretty clear cut on its face). This is one of those cases where it's awfully hard to oppose the death penalty, given the heinous nature of the crime committed, but I still do prefer to let God do the ultimate judging. (Oh boy - here come the nasty retorts to my stance, I'm sure. But let's please remember that we all have a right to our own opinions and to disagree!)

Valerie, The "assault rifles" that are sold (and the one used in Colorado) are just look-alike rifles. These are not the same as the fully automatic weapons used by police and military. They're just styled to mimic real assault rifles. Fully automatic "machine gun" weapons are not available to private citizens without Federal permit.

Timothy McVeigh didn't use an assault weapon. We should ban fertilizer. The 911 hijackers didn't use an assault weapon. We should ban box cutters.

There are already hundreds of gun laws, laws against murder, theft, etc... Laws do not stop the lawless. There are evil people in this world. It is sad, but true. If someone is hell bent on killing someone, or many, they will find a way to try even if the assault weapon was never invented.