POLL: Will You Feel Safe at The Movies?

Escott O. Norton July 20, 2012 at 02:00 pm

This could have happened anywhere, it has nothing to do with going to the movies. Being in a dark movie house and sharing the experience of watching a great movie with a bunch of other folks is one of my favorite things. If I were going to let a random crazy person with a gun change my behavior I wouldn't go to high school, college, the post office, a shopping mall, the airport, a bank, the street, etc. I refuse to be ruled by fear. My sympathies to those the families of those innocents that lost their lives in this and previous similar incidents.

Kristen Lepore (Editor) July 20, 2012 at 02:27 pm

A statement from AMC Theatres: "We are terribly saddened by the random act of violence in Aurora and our thoughts are with the victims and their families. For the safety and security of our guests and associates, we are actively working with local law enforcement in communities throughout the nation and under the circumstances we are reaching out to all of our theatres to review our safety and security procedures. Being a safe place in the community for all our guests is a top priority at AMC and we take that responsibility very seriously."

Lisa Maiorana July 20, 2012 at 03:27 pm

Sadly this is why I really don't feel safe anywhere now a days, this is what's happening in or community - a degradation of society where you don't feel comfortable bringing your children anywhere....sad

Henk Friezer July 20, 2012 at 08:07 pm

Unfortunately we should not be surprised by incidents like this, as long as the NRA and gun lobby control lawmaking in this country these sort of events will continue in various manners. No one objects to weapons for sport, but what we objects to is the easy accessibility and type of weapons. What do hollow point bullets and semi- automatic and assault weapons have to do with sport or protection? The NRA and their supporters are a bigger threat to this country than the Taliban and their fellow terrorists, every time senseless deaths like this take place the NRA can put another notch in their weaponry since they are ultimately responsible for putting the weapon in the hands of the fanatics. More deaths are caused in this country by "law abiding" citizens

Henk Friezer July 20, 2012 at 08:22 pm

continuing my previous comment: Gun advocates proclaim that the Constitution gives them the right to bears arms. When that law was written by our founders, this young nation had no standing armed forces or police so it was a necessity at that time. Had our founders foreseen what lunacy was to transpire in the future of their new country they would surely have written some safeguards into the amendment to protect its citizens. Today, more killings are committed by" law abiding " gun owners that all terrorist acts combined, we should fear these homegrown terrorists more than outside threats. So do not be shocked by future acts of senseless murders like in Colorado,because as long as easy access these weapons to anyone is around these acts will go on.
Gun supporters will no reply to my letter as to why they should be allowed to own their weaponry so they can continue to kill their fellow man in the name of self protection.

Drew Ready July 20, 2012 at 08:22 pm

I think the great social psychologist Elliot Aronson would say it is our failing as a society that we do not provide opportunities for all children and young adults to learn to learn to 1.to control our impulses 2. to cooperate with others 3. appreciate our differences and practice empathy and compassion. He wrote an important book after the tragedy of Columbine that we should all refer to after events like this. Here is an excerpt from the first chapter: http://www.jigsaw.org/chapter1.htm

Leslie Aitken July 21, 2012 at 01:58 pm

Considering the type of "arms" used in 1776, I believe that our forefathers were protecting our right to bear cannons and muskets. Considering the amount of time it took to load a musket -- there is NO WAY that I think they could have imagined protecting the "right" of crazed lunatics in possession of semi automatic guns being used to shoot innocents at a public gathering..

Chris July 21, 2012 at 01:58 pm

These kinds of polls are both reactionary and unnecessary. It's a one-off and probably won't happen again for a while.
I just don't see the point in trying to make people paranoid about going to the movies. I thought this kind of poll was reserved for mainstream media.

S. Ray July 21, 2012 at 08:23 pm

This is the most nonsensical rant I have ever read. A couple of things bear noting. First, our founders wanted Constitutional protection of the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms to protect them FROM the government. That right was the 2nd amendment to the Constitution, right after the 1st amendment, which gives us the right to free speech (so that your nonsensical rant is protected), the right to free press (which gives you your job), the right to free association (so that those of your ilk as well as the NRA members can join together for their respective causes), and freedom of religion. The founders lived under British tyranny and saw the need to have an armed citizenry able to rise up and protect their freedom, even to the point of forming a "well-regulated" militia.
As for blaming the NRA for the Aurora shootings, that makes as much sense as blaming the fertilizer lobby for the Oklahoma City bombing or the airline lobby for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The NRA did not put the guns in the hands of the Aurora killer, nor did it influence him to booby trap his apartment. What is more, in states where gun ownership is more common, gun related deaths are consistently lower than in states with stronger gun control laws and lower rates of gun ownership. The simple fact is that people are less likely to engage in firearm related violence if they fear their victims may be able to retaliate in kind, and that includes crazy people like the Aurora killer.

Ron Rosen July 21, 2012 at 10:08 pm

If the media simply stopped reporting these incidents, I'm sure they would occur less often. This will never happen, for any number of explanations that the media will offer. I think incidents like this are a cry for attention. If they were not reported, those who act out in this way would be far less motivated to do so.

Michael Brand July 22, 2012 at 12:50 am

Henk,
Are you under the impression what the shooter did was legal because the NRA controls lawmaking? Let me assure you he broke many state and federal laws. Do you know of ANY law that deters criminals/mentallyunstable? I'm guessing not.

Otis July 22, 2012 at 01:16 am

"Gun supporters will no reply to my letter". "No reply to my letter", what the heck does that mean and what letter are you talking about? Sorry, but your post is a tad bit confusing. Did you mean they "will not reply to my letter"? And then we can circle back to what letter you are referring to.
All the best

Susan Moriarty July 22, 2012 at 02:33 pm

Or another alternative thought. Why is it that we keep coming back to the same incidents? Columbine, Virginia Tech, Arizona with Gabby Giffords, in some senses The Trayvon Martin case in Florida and now Aurora, Col. There are common factors in each: mentally deranged people, who are still able to purchase guns. We are horrified when it happens, we express our sympathies, the letters to the editor, various blogs and discussion boards light up for a few weeks debating all the ins an outs, and yet nothing is done to prevent it from happening again. We go on our way and nothing changes until the next incident, which will happen again. I think the bigger question is why is this ok? Are we all that desensitized to the violence around us that we just accept it as normal? That is really scary. We have the most lax laws for gun control of any country in the world and we have the highest rate of murders by gunshot as well. "A well regulated Militia" does not mean that anyone who desires any kind of gun they want should be able to happen as their constitutional right. Somewhere we need some common sense, that prevents an individual citizen from purchasing assault rifles and magazines to hold 700 rounds of ammunition without someone asking some questions. Somewhere along the line we have to be able to prevent someone with mental health issues to purchase guns, period, for protection of themselves and others. I am tired of the ostrich syndrome. Someday it could be our kids, or us.

Henk Friezer July 22, 2012 at 03:55 pm

in response to the ranting replies of the NRA members to my statements.
- To Mr Ray: lawbreakers will get guns no matter what, usually from those who got them legally, what I am implying is that the NRA and their supporters make it easier for those who fanatical act on their minds to get them without much deterrent to commit their vicious acts. Why do we need AK 47s and semi automatics weapons to "protect" ourselves. Do you truly believe that citizens with weaponry can stand up to our government (is that not called anarchy) unlike many dictatorial nations we have safeguards. Your reasoning smacks of those fanatics in Idaho and Montana who do not recognize our government. Like many fanatics they reason that the Constitution gives them the right to further their deranged thoughts. -In response to Mr Otis: Any educated person would have realized that "no" was a typo it should have said "now", but it gave you a good reason to rant about my letter

Otis July 22, 2012 at 04:23 pm

Henk- You consider my post to be a "rant"? Read it again, it is anything but a rant. Secondly I don't belong to the NRA, thus please don't make that assumption.
You still have not explained what your letter is about or to whom it was addressed to. Are you saying your post to this board is a letter? I am being very respectful to you in my posts, I am asking for simple clarification. If you do not wish to respond just say NOYB. But do not cast aspersions against my character, level of education, or assume my collaboration with National organizations. You know nothing about me. One thing is you should have noted by now is I haven’t said if I am pro-gun, anti-gun, or neutral. I would think you would want to establish that fact first. All the best

John Q. Public July 23, 2012 at 02:29 pm

Henk, I think you should educate yourself on weapons nomenclature before you spout the same anti-gun rhetoric that you always leave on posts like these. First, a semi-automatic is no different than a revolver; one trigger pull = one bullet fired. A good percentage of handguns and hunting rifles are semi-automatic and have been since the early 1900's. Secondly, an assault weapon is a weapon that is capable of "select-fire" meaning that it has the capability to fire fully automatic; one trigger pull = many bullets fired. These weapons are not legal to own except for cops, military and licensed (and strictly controlled) collectors and have been that way since 1934. The modern weapons that are assigned the term "assault weapon" have been so labeled by the ignorant media and even more ignorant politicians because of how they look and has nothing to do with functionality. These so-called "assault weapons" are only different because they look scary, not how they function compared to any other rifle.

John Q. Public July 23, 2012 at 02:42 pm

Your assumption that the NRA is in control is also a fallacy. The NRA only represents 3.4 million of the estimated 52 million lawful gun owners who have not and will never harm anyone with their almost 258 million privately owned firearms. I am not a member of the NRA and nor will I ever be. The NRA does not represent the majority of American gun owners, most of us feel no need to politicize our gun rights. We just want to be left alone to excericse a right of self defense that trancends the US Constitution and is a basic human right that all free men should enjoy. Yes, there are bad people in this world who do terrible things, but you cannot lump the other 52 million law-abiding gun owners in with them. I own the exact same weapons that the shooter in Colorado used, but I can guarantee the only person who will be "assaulted" with them will be the poor b@stard who breaks into my home with evil intent.
Lastly Henk, explain to me how 12 people were killed and 52 others were injured in a city with some of CO's stricted anti-gun laws? Nevermind, it's because criminals and psychopaths DO NOT follow the law and go to places they know that they can fire on people with little resistance. Ever wonder why nobody tries a mass shooting at a firing range?

John Q. Public July 23, 2012 at 02:59 pm

Susan, you missed the second half of that sentence from the Constitution that states "the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Who makes the call as to who is crazy, and who is not? You? Our government? If no one has the preexisisting conditions (felon, psychiatric holds for violent tendencies) then who decides who is fit? As a free man, I would prefer to take my chances with the isolated and rare occurrence nutjobs over the government telling me I cannot excercise the basic human right of defending myself and those I love.
Secondly, no law in the world or human history has barred those with evil intent from committing their heinous acts. Look at Washington DC and Chicago as an example. Both cities have very strict permitting requirements for firearm ownership (permitting before purchase), yet their murder rates are far higher than any other US cities. Why? Because criminals will always get a gun regardless of the laws prohibiting them from doing so.

John Q. Public July 23, 2012 at 03:22 pm

You're surprised, Chris?? This site is owned by Huffington Post/AOL; two of the most staunchly anti-gun media outlets behind MSNBC and the NY Times.

John Q. Public July 23, 2012 at 03:24 pm

You may have a point there, Ron. Maybe this whacko was seeking the notariety/infamy?

John Q. Public July 23, 2012 at 03:40 pm

So by your reasoning, the American Revolution was anarchy? What good are the "safeguards" you speak of if they are ignored by those we elect and trust to defend them? The safeguard is in the the Constitution that does not grant rights to the people, but in turn bars the government from overreach. It is our job as citizens of this republic to keep the powers that be in line with the Constitution. The rights enumerated in the Constitution are only codified as a protection of basic human rights, they existed long before the Constitution was written. The Second Amendment is only there to codify a free man's basic right to defend himself from those who wish him harm (and yes, some believe this to include the government), just like the other amendments codify other basic rights like speaking one's mind, a right to a fair trial and being free from a warrantless search. The Constitution is in place to guarantee that free people can go about their business unmolested by governmental overreach.

S. Ray July 23, 2012 at 09:08 pm

First of all, it's Ms. Ray, not Mr. Second of all, in light of the Fast & Furious program, who's to say that the purchase of these guns by the Aurora shooter was not encouraged by Eric Holder's Justice Department? After all, we have no assurance that the guns sold in that program only went to Mexico. Those guns were sold without the usual waiting periods and background checks, however. Third, I agree that we have other means of speaking out and obtaining redress from our government, but the founders had no assurance that it would be that way. Remember, Benjamin Franklin thought that we would have a king within 50 years after the Constitution was adopted. It is only when the government becomes unresponsive, confiscatory and dictatorial such that we are deprived of our basic liberties that it would becomes necessary for the citizenry to rise up. Thankfully, due to the success of the American experiment, that has not been necessary, but I would argue that America has not been attacked on a large scale because it has an armed citizenry as well as a sound defense. I do recognize our government, and I support it, which is precisely why I think that it is important that we as Americans protect our fundamental rights, including the right to keep and bear arms. As Ronald Reagan said, freedom is never more than a generation away from being lost.

Otis July 23, 2012 at 10:00 pm

Maybe Mr. Friezer should go rent "Red Dawn", or wait until the re-make of "Red Dawn" comes out just prior to Thanksgiving this year, and go see it. Then maybe he will realize the purpose of the Second Amendment. This movie, which is considered a classic, provides an example of the purpose of the Second Amendment in modern context and supports the reasoning of why we haven't been invaded since the early 1900's and why we haven't ever lost a war fought on this continent going all the way back to the orgins of this country.

Sequoya July 23, 2012 at 10:47 pm

This poll is a joke. I don't get why there has to be little statements tagged onto the yes or no choices. And what does the location have to do with how we might feel about it? This incident absolutely does NOT make me afraid to go to the movies (I mean, hello, a jet-engine could land on your house right now). What scares me is the fact that it was so easy for this guy to get his hands on so many weapons and that he was able to just stroll into a movie theatre with all of them proudly displayed - yet I had to throw away my water bottle after my purse was checked at the Academy Theatre last week. What planet am I on?! To say that there needs to be a better/smarter system for controlling guns is a huge understatement. This shooting spree is the side-effect of a flawed system (and a flawed mental-health system) and rather than being afraid of what might happen when we step outside we should be taking steps to make sure it's not so easy to get your hands on a gun.