Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team.
A look at the "Batman killer" front pages.
I am a gun owner. I believe in the right to defending yourself. I also live less than three miles from the cinema, and my next door neighbor had a good friend who was shot. Why dont you do everyone a favor and stop making your fatusous rote statements, ok? 71 hit in 90 seconds is not something that can be done with a cord, or a bat, or a machete. The fact that you know this means you are willing to dissemble, in the middle of all this, to advance your ideological platform shows your utter lack of moral grounding.
You can't kill 12 people in a crowd with an electrical cord you lunatic, you wouldn't have spree killers without firearms. Simple fact is that when anyone can get hold of a gun these type of incidents will occur.
You can certainly do it with a car. Let's ban cars, right Einstein?
Let's play a game. I'll give you a choice. Either I drive a car and try to hit you or I'll get a gun and try to shoot you. What would you choose?
Exactamundo Kreskin, you can't support your line of logic so here we are...
"In 2010, 10,228 people were killed by drunk driving and approximately 350,000 were injured".
I guess one by one deaths are OK but 12 at one time is a disaster? That about got it?
BBERNET - America has sky high gun crime (and murder) rates relative to the rest of the West. Be like the UK, and severely restrict gun ownership, or be like Switzerland and actually teach everyone how to use the damn things responsibly. A "right to bear arms" approach is just asking for trouble.
'Therefore, the law-abiding citizens should be able to protect themselves.'
That went well then.
The US Constitution allows citizens to be armed. Criminals will always find ways to obtain guns. That's why they are called criminals. Therefore, the law-abiding citizens should be able to protect themselves. The people of the United States will never give up their 2nd Amendment rights. This killer will never again see the light of day. Thank God the USA is not Norway.
Yep, it worked really well in that cinema didn't it. They all fought him off with their guns didn't they. Oh, wait a minute, no, they didn't, they just got shot.
'We need guns to fight off all the people with guns'...you couldn't make it up
Actually, the theatre was a gun free zone...
Criminals will have a much easier time if guns can be easily bought. The constitution is an out of date with little relation to life today. Thanks god Norway isn't the USA.
The law-abiding citizens ambushed and killed have been sadly failed by the US system, killed by yet another mentally-ill person failed by that same system. Placing such an onus on individual freedoms seems like burying one's head in the sand rather than facing up to the problem. Yes, this killer might never see the light of day but the next one will be 'free' to carry out the same attacks.
The second amendment rights were meant to be with regard to bearing arms as part of an organised militia, until the Supreme Court ruled that part of the amendment wasn't required! It's not right to claim the constitution sacrosanct while cherry-picking from it.
BTW the 2005 quality of life index lists Norway as 3rd globally; the US 13th. So I'm sure the Norwegians agree with you.
"The US Constitution allows citizens to be armed. Criminals will always find ways to obtain bombs. That's why they are called criminals. Therefore, the law-abiding citizens should be able to protect themselves."
"The US Constitution allows citizens to be armed. Criminals will always find ways to obtain missiles. That's why they are called criminals. Therefore, the law-abiding citizens should be able to protect themselves."
"The US Constitution allows citizens to be armed. Criminals will always find ways to obtain nuclear weapons. That's why they are called criminals. Therefore, the law-abiding citizens should be able to protect themselves."
How much more ridiculous would you like me to make this argument? But it's no good, the people of the US have decided that they would rather have their freedoms to live in fear of each other despite the price they have to pay again and again and again.
Daily Star cover: Soft porn. Free Great British Cupcakes from Greggs. Batman psycho shoots 12 dead. Proud to be British.
That sums up our times doesn't it?
I quite agree, but I think it's hypocritical of the New Statesman to say so after their own Breivik cover.
too be fair the daily mail hates the Nolan batman films so they will go on for months blaming the films themselves for the massacre rather then attack himself, his probable mental illness and light gun control. cause you know guns don't kill people, people don't kill people, things that are popular kill people according to the daily mail.
The Grauniad seems as if they clearly knew the rules, but couldn't help breaking them - but they felt guilty about it so tried to shove their breaking of the rules into an inconspicuous corner somewhere. E.g. I can see the editorial thought process, "the news value of that mug shot is just too great to leave out, whatever the psychologists say - but we'll print it less than one inch square to salve our conscience".
The others simply don't care.
Yet, if the Guardian had followed the rules, they'd have come under considerable criticism for not having covered it.
A true tragedy. A truer tragedy will be when this happens again in a different way.
My thoughts are with the people that died in this massacre but when you leave a fire unattended sooner or later someone will get burned. Its a sad and painful fact, gun control needs to be tighter. Guns are not toys of amusement and they should not be bought over the counter like toys.
Helen Lewis is deputy editor of the New Statesman. She tweets @helenlewis