Colo. shooting re-ignites gun control debate

WASHINGTON (CBS News) The carnage in Aurora, Colorado has re-opened the nation's debate about gun control. The issue came up after the 1999 Columbine massacre, but has largely been dormant since former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot 2011. New legislation is a long shot, especially in an election year. And while there is talk about about restricting who can own guns, sales of guns themselves are climbing.

One day after the mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado, this Virginia firing range is packed.

Firearms instructor Mark Briley has a schedule of students. He said the tragedy in Aurora shouldn't change who can own one.

Explosives in Colo. shooter's apt. successfully deactivated
The Aurora shooting victims
Photos: The Colorado massacre suspect
Complete coverage: Colorado Movie Theater Massacre

"It makes no sense to penalize people for doing the right thing because a person does the wrong thing."

And gun owners have not been penalized. In fact, there hadn't been any new restrictions on gun ownership in the U.S. in the past four years. There are very few politicians willing to publicly battle to ban certain weapons.

"The bottom line is if we had fewer guns, we would have a lot fewer murders," said New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. In an interview on Face the Nation to air Sunday, he blamed both President Obama and Mitt Romney for failing to do enough.

"It's time for both of them to be held accountable," said Bloomberg.

Yet popular fear of new laws has helped to pump up gun sales. Ruger and Smith & Wesson are backlogged with orders.

In the last three months, sales at Smith & Wesson are up 28 percent. Alleged shooter James Holmes also used one of their assault rifles to carry out the massacre. And applications for FBI background checks to buy guns are climbing.

While new laws aren't likely, first-time gun owner Annie Fowler said police should work harder to enforce existing laws for gun buyers.

"I think they're have been some laxes in how it's been done and I think it's important that it really be done -- a little bit of rigor," she said.

Even if new laws are enacted, it is unlikely that they would be able to separate gun owners from the nearly 300 million firearms already in U.S. households.

[AccuracyMatters]

Why does the media keep pushing gun control? The issue behind the Colorado massacre is mental illness. I have read dozens of news stories in the media about the need to address gun control. Every story has a 10:1 response from commentors in favor of the right to bear arms. Yet, the media keeps publishing reports on the need for gun control. I don't own a gun but I can tell you -- the problem is mental illness. That's what lead to those deaths in Aurora, CO, at Fort Hood, at Virginia Tech, at Columbine. Take all the guns away & a mentally ill person who wants to kill will use a car or chemicals or bombs (anyone remember Timothy McVeigh?). Why don't we do something really productive for a change & work out solutions to treat the mentally ill rather harp on gun control?

[BeadStallCup]

Politicians will never be able to pass enough gun control laws to stop the criminal, or the crazies who are determined to hurt other people, for whatever insane reason. Criminals and crazies will never abide by any gun laws. Sadly, there are (and will always be...) really bad/crazy people in the world, who want to hurt others -- and a zillion new gun laws will never stop them. Many people dream of a day when no one wants to kill anyone or anything, but that day is not coming, not in this century. Sorry. The only people more gun control laws will disarm will be good people, like you and me, who will obey the laws. But the criminals and the whackos will NEVER abide by any gun laws. It was much against the laws to shoot another person, but did that stop crazy case James Holmes? Nope, and a zillion new gun ban laws will never stop a vicious creep like him. So, is it time to stop believing that politicians, TV-pundits and the police will always be able to come to our rescue in desperate situations like Aurora? About 96% of the time the good guys won't show up -- in time. They will always try, to be sure, but frequently they just don't make it. The police can't be everywhere at once. Question. Is having our self-serving politicians pass more gun ban laws which will disarm all Americans a good idea? Do you really think you'll be safer then? I mean, from loose cannons like James "Bat Crazy" Holmes? You can never be sure a few more bat crazies like him aren't walking the streets of your town. How about at night in your neighborhood? If everyone was disarmed by law, you'd be defenseless, if some lunatic decided to prowl around outside your house or fly in through your window. Would the police arrive in time? They would try, I'm sure, but what if they didn't make it. Without a weapon to defend yourself, what would be the family plan? Besides, if all law abiding Americans are disarmed, guess who would really enjoy knowing about it? The buglars, the rapists and the night stranglers. You'd be unarmed and utterly defenseless, and, oh yes, these types of criminals (or wannabe criminals) would know it too. They would know it's probably safe to enter your house at night, when everyone is asleep. But what would you do if a rapist or night strangler had his eye on you or some member of your family, and this creep is twice your size? You got no gun, so what do you do? Run? Where? Out of your own home? But shouldn't that be the safest place in your world? Under a total ban, even your own home wouldn't really be safe. Nope, sorry. And, the big politicians in Washington are fully aware of this. So why would they want to make you so vulnerable, even in your own home, especially at night? Yet many of them actually what to do this to you. Think about that... Isn't it time we have to stop listening to self-serving politicians, the TV-media pundits and even the police when they guarantee and always promise to come to our rescue. They didn't quite make it to the movies on time in Aurora, Colorado, did they? Nope. Their tried, but it was just too late. It's time for Americans to wake up! You have have the perfect to defend yourself and your family, anywhere, anytime, regardless of what some politician, TV-pundit or policeman tells you. You have every right to do so at all times, anywhere! So now, isn't it time we start taking personal responsibility for defending ourselves and our families? Isn't it time to stop living under the politically-motivated illusion that someone else is always going to take care of us and come to our rescue? Hate to say this, but you and I know an incident like Aurora, Colorado is going to happen again, somewhere sometime... We best stop listening to the two-faced politicians and the TV-media pundits telling us more laws will protect us. No gun control law is going to protect us from the bat crazies or the criminally minded person. Not today, not ever! You best think about being ready to personally defend yourself on the streets and at the movie theatres, when it happens again, maybe in your town next time...

[wmdmia]

to 1stlttightwad So it is ok for the government to force you to buy a gun. This idea of having a nanny style government that instructs you on what you can or cannot own and proceeds to take your choice away is an odd way to view the right to bear arms. Suddenly it becomes the command to bear arms.

[wmdmia]

The NRA must be looking forward to more wild west style conflicts. The right to bear arms sole purpose was to allow the people to overthrow its own government should it go bad. It went bad during the Bush administration after he violated the constitution when he pushed through the 'Patriot Act' and illegally invaded Iraq, directly and indirectly causing the deaths of several hundred thousand innocent lives. This was a war crime. The very people that support the NRA did not care that Bush was violating our Constitution, they didn't care that took away some of our basic rights, or that he murdered thousands of innocent people, the only thing that was important to them was that he allowed them to keep their guns. What a sad thing.

[wmdmia]

The NRA must be looking forward to more wild west style conflicts. The right to bear arms sole purpose was to allow the people to overthrow its own government should it go bad. It went bad during the Bush administration after he violated the constitution when he pushed through the 'Patriot Act' and illegally invaded Iraq, directly and indirectly causing the deaths of several hundred thousand innocent lives. This was a war crime. The very people that support the NRA did not care that Bush was violating our Constitution, they didn't care that took away some of our basic rights, or that he murdered thousands of innocent people, the only thing that was important to them was that he allowed them to keep their guns. What a sad thing.

[infantryman1968]

Colo. shooting re-ignites gun control debate


LOL!


About 200 people are killed from shootouts every week from domestic terrorism and Obama and his followers say and do nothing.

The Irony.

[infantryman1968]

by 1stlttightwad July 22, 2012 7:49 AM EDT
Yup with 47% of American's owning guns even the Democrat gun lovers would drop him like a hot potato. Even Obama isn't that stupid.


LOL!


Now that F&F failed. He's going for the U.N. Ban.

[1stlttightwad]

He and Hillary are going to have a go at it..However, 59 senators have sent a letter to him that any treaty would be dead on arrival. The only thing keeping him from issuing another edict is that ALL treaties MUST be ratified by congress.

[infantryman1968]

by Jaylah54200 July 21, 2012 11:16 PM EDT
Does anybody remember what happened in the days after September 11, 2001? "We [were] all New Yorkers that day." People started putting American flags on their cars. Even if we weren't actually all New Yorkers, we were all Americans. We all walked around with shell-shocked faces and nobody asked anybody else who their favorite political party was. Politics didn't really seem to matter much.

And 11 years later? Look at us. "Libtards." "Demorats." "TeaBaggers." "Rethuglicons." And god help those of us independent thinkers who don't agree or disagree with ALL of any specific party's ideas. We get it from both sides.

Which makes me wonder: how many people have to die at one time to make us treat each other with civility? Obviously, 12 is not nearly enough.


LOL!

12 people die in Chicago from domestic terrorist shootings every week. Another 100 over the other 10 population centers of the U.S.

Where is you outrage on that?

[infantryman1968]

Colo. shooting re-ignites gun control debate


LOL!


Yea, Obama and his followers should ramp up gun control before the November election.

They may want to talk to Bill Clinton first.

[1stlttightwad]

Yup with 47% of American's owning guns even the Democrat gun lovers would drop him like a hot potato. Even Obama isn't that stupid.

[1stlttightwad]

Addendum..Remember Obama's open mike statement to Medvedev.".Tell Putin that after I'm RE-ELECTED I'll HAVE MORE LEEWAY" Leeway to do WHAT, to whom, not just guns but anything that has to do with the Constitution and the Rule Of Law that he and Holder decide which laws they will enforce.

[lillyhorton]

Was the weapon registered with the state? How about the explosives in his apt? Guns are all over the streets thanks to the US government who resales confiscated weapons to Mexico And other countries. Mexicans sell them back to the public. If a person wants to kill they will find a way. It is a no brainer.

[1stlttightwad]

Fortunately, guns are not registered with anyone..Registration would provide a list of who owns what and give a tyrannical gov. a map to come and try to get your guns..That is why they are no records kept after 90 days..Hope you noticed that I said..TRY.