In light of the Colorado shootings, what kind of role should gun control play in the presidential campaign?
July 23rd, 2012
04:14 PM ET

In light of the Colorado shootings, what kind of role should gun control play in the presidential campaign?

By CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The massacre at a Colorado movie theater has shaken the nation to its foundation, but it's unlikely to shake up the presidential race.

Both President Obama and Mitt Romney have been relatively silent when it comes to gun control.

The White House says that the president doesn't have plans to push for new gun laws but that he wants to "take steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have them under existing law." Gee, that's bold.

As for Romney, he signed an assault weapons ban as governor of Massachusetts but has since said he's against gun control.
Romney recently told the NRA that the country needs a president "who will enforce current laws, not create new ones that only serve to burden lawful gun owners."

The NRA has an estimated 4 million members, and neither candidate wants to alienate these folks. Also, polls show support for gun control measures plummeting in recent years. Some Democrats think support of gun control is one of the reasons Al Gore lost in 2000.

There are close to 300 million guns in this country. We are the most heavily armed country in the world. It's unlikely legal gun owners will be willing to part with their firearms without a struggle.

On Friday in Aurora, 12 people were killed and 58 wounded, and Colorado police say the suspect bought his guns legally at stores in the Denver area.

And some on both sides of the aisle agree that even the tightest gun control laws might not keep weapons out of the hands of a crazy person who wants them.

Here’s my question to you: In light of the Colorado shootings, what kind of role should gun control play in the presidential campaign?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.

Posted by
Filed under: 2012 Election • Guns
soundoff (254 Responses)
  1. Russ in PA

    None. How many people have cops mistakenly killed this year? Or how many people have been killed by drones this year, without any regard to due process?

    July 23, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
  2. EdfromMD

    None, it would be rediculous to make policy for a nation based on the actions of one person. The government made drugs illegal but you know what?, there are plenty of drugs in America and if somebody wants some they can get them. So keep gun owners law abiding citizens and hope somebody has one the next time a lunatic pops up.

    July 23, 2012 at 1:56 pm |
  3. Tom in Desoto, TX

    It will play no role. It’s a Republican sacred cow and if Obama bring it up he’ll get slaughtered. The only way the House and Senate will do something meaningful is if both houses of Congress are taken over and blood is spilled to a far greater extent than what happened in Colorado. Only then will Wayne LaPierre’s bunch be sent packing.

    July 23, 2012 at 1:57 pm |
  4. james in greenville nc

    Jack, in a tight race like this one gun control will play no role whatsoever. Any candidate advocating gun control is sure to be the loser.

    July 23, 2012 at 1:57 pm |
  5. Brad, Portland, OR

    I think it's more a matter of letting mentally ill people go undiagnosed and untreated in our society.

    After Reagan opened California's mental hospitals and dumped the patients out on the street to fend for themselves, the federal government and every state copied him.

    That's why the homeless problem is so much worse now than it was decades ago.

    And that's why we're seeing more of these Colorado-style events, when the mentally ill get access to weapons instead of access to medical treatment.

    July 23, 2012 at 1:57 pm |
  6. Tonybottomline

    It should play a major role: Obviously the Status Quo, isn't working. We the smart voters must make sure we elect the right people for President and Congress, who will pass and sign common sense laws to deal with GUN CONTROL.

    July 23, 2012 at 1:59 pm |
  7. Mark, Oklahoma City, OK

    The movie theater where this shooting took place BANNED legal gun owners who had conceal carry permits. We need a law that says if you can legally carry a gun, then you can carry it ANYWHERE. Those signs on businesses that ban handguns are saying, ""Armed criminals come on in.....we are defenseless".

    July 23, 2012 at 2:00 pm |
  8. Paul, Parry Sound, Ontario

    I doubt that either candidate will say much about gun control because the gun lobby is just too strong in the U. S. What you need is a third candidate, a straight shooter of proven calibre who could trigger a movement.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:01 pm |
  9. James - Alexandria, VA

    None. Gun issues have been going on for some time now and it is very apparent no one is willing to do anything about it. So why bother.......

    July 23, 2012 at 2:01 pm |
  10. DT - Saint Paul, MN

    None. This isnt a gun control issue in my opinion, it's a crazy kid issue. This is a local crime, and barely a state issue. To make it national is just silly.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:01 pm |
  11. Phyllis G Williams

    In light of the Colorado shootings, what kind of role should gun control play in the presidential campaign?

    "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword –
    (Matthew 26: 52 ; Revelation 13: 10).
    However, guns have to be used for warfare, and should only be allowed to be purchased for that purpose.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:02 pm |
  12. Brenda From Ontario Canada

    I will be honest and say I hate guns; I deplore the fact that guns of any kind are so easily available; but let's get real here – guns are not the problem, people are and if someone wants to get hold of a gun to carry out some horrendous, evil deed they will find a gun whether it be legal or illegal. If they can't get their hands on a gun they will use some other weapon or build a bomb.

    People are the problem – the question is, how do we fix the problem???

    July 23, 2012 at 2:04 pm |
  13. Ed from California

    Jack.....the second amendment says nothing about the average citizen carrying arms. The second amendment says a, Well Regulated Militia can bear arms (today, we have no Militia's just the armed services. So the second is a mute point). What is really needed is: 1. All money out of politics, 2. All lobbying out of politics, 3. The supreme court out of politics and 4. All special interests out of politics. We really need our hired help to stand up to the NRA, and the gun nuts to stand down. But, our politicians could be members of the world's oldest profession....because they certainly whore themselves out to the highest bidder.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:06 pm |
  14. Jenny Sills from Rome Georgia

    I think it would be good to remember that not only did he used guns to kill and terrorize, his whole apartment was booby trapped and wired to kill as well. So even if this country had stricter gun laws, I do not know that the tragedy could have been prevented. There would have just been different victims.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:10 pm |
  15. jk in MN

    It should have a place, I doubt that the framers of the 2nd amendment had any idea of the power of today's guns when they wrote it. There is no good reason I can see for an ordinary citizen to need assault rifles and handguns that can shoot 100 bullets without reloading. I doubt either party will have the guts to stand up to the NRA lobby thought. Remember Lobbyists seem to have Washington hypnotized.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:15 pm |
  16. ken, atlantic city, nj

    Although the colorado shooting is making news 50 people are murdered everyday in the u.s.. The u.s. is the murder capitol of the world, but you only hear about it from the media when there is a multiple shooting. 38 other people died as well as the 12 in colorado the day of the shooting, and 50 more will be murdered today and everyday this year. Who mourns for the other 15,000+ who will be murdered this year.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:15 pm |
  17. David of Alexandria VA

    None. If it was that important on the nation's mind, it would have come into play before this. People kill people, Jack. sometimes they use guns, cars, planes, IED's, anthrax in letters, and amonium nitrate fertilizers. If they are deranged enough to want to, they will not let a few gun laws get between themselves and infamy. In a global economy flush with arms and ammo, what you ban here you can get somewhere else. There are many times more drunk drivers who represent a clear and present threat behind the wheels of cars right this second than mass murders sitting with a few guns and a pile of ammo. We somehow comfort ourselves that more regulations will keep us safe. Just like the folks in New Orleans thought the levees were their salvation. We should focus on getting better at finding the deranged - because sure as helll they will keep getting better at finding new and improved ways of killing us.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:16 pm |
  18. Thomas Archibald

    Gun control is NOT the problem. When you outlaw certain guns, only outlaws will have them! My opinion is that the Hollywood movie industry plays the biggest role, whereby they glamorize violence, mayhem, sex and drugs!

    July 23, 2012 at 2:17 pm |
  19. Barbara

    Get off it Jack. No one is going to take anyone's guns, no one is going to enforce the laws, and the NRA is just hog-wild and pig-crazy about all the fear this puts in people - they sell more guns and membership goes up.

    Stop the melodrama and theatrics. Ratings for CNN tanked a long time ago.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:17 pm |
  20. Paul Austin Texas

    It should only be that action should be taken to stop the sale of large magazines such as the barrel type that can hold an unneeded amount of rounds like 100. In addition any other large magazines. Also the need for someone not in the military or security assault weapons should not be needed at all. But not a full ban on all weapons because the bad people can get them anyway and will we should still have a right to bear arms.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:18 pm |
  21. Greg in Arkansas

    I sincerely hope that NEITHER campaign would try to make political mileage off the blood of innocent victims.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:19 pm |
  22. Mel - Houston

    President Obama will not raise the issue because he knows its a hot button issue for the Republicans. I had to laugh at the media coverage of that disaster on Sunday. The news gave the standard update of the progress of the investigation and then switched to the citizens in Aurora, CO in church praying for the dead and the suffering. What did you think was going to happen if everyone has a gun whether he or she is stable or unstable? Why is everyone surprised that an event like this happens. We do everything we can to make the situation worse and then go to church and pray. I'm sure God is having a good laugh as well.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:20 pm |
  23. bonnie from NJ

    It should play a role but it won't. Once again the big mouth minority (NRA and cronies) will be the one heard, not the mojority of us who want some sort of gun control. They strike fear in any politician who even mentions something about gun control. I cannot believe that most Americans are ok with just any person owning the kind of weaponry this person (legally) had and I know our law enforcement personnel doesn't like it.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
  24. calvin

    None the people like this can get guns even if there sales were band guns do not kill people due. If the police and fbi nd cia could profile these wack jobs that would save more lives then gun control.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:25 pm |
  25. sbolaria

    The threat of gun murders and mass shootings has gone unabated in this country for too long. The slight alterations in gun regulation in Colorado following Columbine clearly wasn't enough as the Aurora shooter was still able to purchase his guns without a problem. This is obviously a problem threatening American's well being and I want to hear the specifics about what the candidates will do to combat it, not just broad comments about it.

    San Mateo, California

    July 23, 2012 at 2:26 pm |
  26. Pete in Florida

    Nearly 75% of Americans favor increased gun control, and few see any justification for citizens to own assault weapons, so this SHOULD play a prominent part in the campaigns of both candidates. Unfortunately, we;ve yet to see any politicians with the guts to stand up to the gun lobby and the NRA. Only in America – 25% holding 75% hostage...at the point of their guns.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
  27. Ken in Pinon Hills, California

    Forget it; the cat was out of the bag when our floundering fathers, on this one, passed the 2nd amendment. As for the candidates they won’t touch the subject, and the moderators during the presidential debates, won’t mention it. Today 80 some persons will die by guns, so keep the flag at half mast until the slaughter stops.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
  28. Shirley, Parry Sound, Ontario

    How about ammunition control instead. Not so much damage can be done by a six-shooter.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
  29. cy gardner

    This should serve as a clear signal that corporations and their lobbyists run this country, not democratically elected officials. Money talks, democracy walks. cy from arlington, va

    July 23, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
  30. Bizz, Quarryville Pennsylvania

    I think it should play an important part because we need to have this conversation. But reality tells me that will never happen because the NRA will not allow it. Any politician who stands up and says the word gun control has just committed political suicide because he NRA will destroy him or her. When Romney was Gov. of Massachusetts he supported a ban against assault rifles. When he decided to run for president he immediately changed his mind and had to convince the NRA that he will never speak of a ban again. Congress has become nothing but a figurehead so if you want answers you have to go to people pulling the strings, in this case it is the NRA.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
  31. Jim in Denver, CO

    It won't play any role whatsoever. You think the Deficit and Economy are polarizing enough subjects?! Gun Control is the most polarizing subject of them all, and both sides know it is political suicide to get with in 100 feet of it.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
  32. Susan from Ca

    Not a word. This incident was a result of a mentally ill man commuting a heinous act. There's plenty of blame to go around here but guns are not the culprits. It's doubtful this man was raised in the canebrake by an ol' mama lion. So where were his parents, grandparents, teachers, siblings etc? I hope the candidates run on the premise that it does take a village. These acts need to stop and we all can help.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:42 pm |
  33. Francis

    Gun control plays the same role as everything else in the Presidential campaign. It's the society that will bear all the burden due to lack of regulation. We have seen how deregulation cause millions out of their homes and jobs, and similar amounts of people being denied health care due to lack of insurance. Shooting like this is what the society would have to bear every now and then when the gun advocates are winning the gun control debate.

    Toronto, Canada

    July 23, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
  34. Greg Turman


    I would ABSOLUTELY love for gun control to be THE issue in the upcoming election.

    There are more gun battles in Chicago than fast & furious Mexico!
    FYI: It is illegal to possess (1) bullet in Mexico.

    Viva La 1994 !!

    Gregory Turman

    July 23, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
  35. John from Alabama

    Jack: It should play a big role, but due to NRA's money and influence it will not be an issue in the campaign. After the campaign, there should be a band on assault rifles, or at least the number of rounds which can be ordered at a given time. When will common sense prevail in this nation. When will Congress vote to do the right thing, because it is the right thing to do?? Hunters can not use assault rifles. Only SWAT Team members need assault weapons. Why?

    July 23, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
  36. Ed in Harrisburg

    Jack, guns don't kill people...clever lunatics and bad guys with guns do...so until we can cure society of clever lunatics and bad guys, let's make it tough for people to get guns. Sorry NRA, but too many people are dying for the wrong reasons for your right to bear arms.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
  37. Kim, Dodge City, Kansas

    Well, Jack, since the NRA lobbyists hold our impotent Congress at what amounts to "gunpoint", I doubt if any serious legislation will become of this. It's too late inject this issue into a campaign platform without sounding totally reactionary and manipulative. This one will be a hard one to pass up for those candidates that feel the need to do some personal grandstanding though.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:47 pm |
  38. Virginia - Atlanta

    Ban assault weapons no one should be allowed to shoot 100 rounds at a time, nor get 6000 rounds of ammunition on the internet.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:48 pm |
  39. JM from DFW


    Creating quality Job opportunities for our nation is most important.

    Doing business with socially responsible companies that give back to our communities is more important than gun control.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:49 pm |
  40. Gary H. Boyd

    A straight-forward position to enforce existing gun control laws would be sufficient Jack. Over reaction because of an obviously deranged monster is misguided. There have been and unfortunately, always will be, a small element of insanity among us that cannot be prevented by restricting citizen rights to bear arms.

    Gary in Scottsdale, Arizona

    July 23, 2012 at 2:51 pm |
  41. Wilhelm in Las Vegas

    I doubt that either candidate will want to put their oar in THAT shark infested water. the NRA has proved that they have the political "clout" to defeat almost anyone that they disagree with. look at the Wisconsin recall. the ONLY reason Scott Walker survived was NRA attack ads against his oponent.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:53 pm |
  42. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    Words are cheap; "The supply is greater than the demand" and Congress and these people won't change a thing. I give them all an A+ in talk and an F- in action. The NRA is too powerful.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:54 pm |
  43. Susan-NJ

    Every time there are mass shootings the gun control question comes up, at every election the question comes up and nothing is done. We have the right to bear arms. We also have thright to not pay for abortions or contraseptives but that is now being ignored. Somewhere there is some sense in all of this. The answer is that Americnas just like to kill in this generation.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:54 pm |
  44. Greg Cox of Bremerton, WA

    None. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Second Amendment. The 'right of the people to keep and bear arms' has proven to be the downfall of a number of elected officials who oppose this principle. Hopefully, more of those elected officials who disregard that amendment will be defeated in the Fall. These elected officials pledge to "support, uphold and defend" the Constitution of the United States. Those who would undermine the Second Amendment by being anti-gun and anti-gun ownership deserve the wrath of all gun owners and gun supporters in the next election by being voted out of office.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:57 pm |
  45. Nancy Burnett

    Jack, I am wondering how many fewer victims there would have been if just one citizen, in that theater, would have legally been carrying a licenced, conceled weapon. Just a thought.

    Nancy in Louisiana

    July 23, 2012 at 2:58 pm |
  46. Richard Texas

    Perhaps if either candidate plan on changing the gun laws then they need to talk about it but if not there is no point. Sometimes bad people do bad things Jack. It does not make every gun owner guilty. Only the idiot that did the bad thing. Anyone intent on inflicting injury to others can accomplish that goal in many ways. If you don't believe me just ask the people in Oklahoma city. They lived and died through the Timothy McVeigh bombing and he used no guns of any kind. On 9-11 it was box cutters and airplanes.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:58 pm |
  47. Gary in San Jose, California

    None. Tight gun control laws didn't and wouldn't keep them away from James Holmes or anyone like him. More lenient gun control laws would have resulted in one or more people in that theater carrying a concealed firearm and that would have changed the outcome. Why don't we ever discuss knife control laws after a stabbing? Maybe because it doesn't work.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:58 pm |
  48. Renee, Illinois

    Unfortunately, it is a part of human nature to steer away from what we know is best for us; just look at the obesity rate in this country. If the civil rights act of the 60's had been put to a popular vote, it never would have passed. Contrary to what the more paranoid among us would like to think, passing stricter gun control laws does not mean repealing the 2nd amendment. Enabling the mass shooting of unarmed civilians, including children, was NEVER what the founding fathers intended. And make no mistake, as long as the more paranoid voices remain the loudest, incidents like this will continue. It's time for both candidates, and their parties, to man up and start fighting for the victims instead of the right to create more victims; whether it's through stricter gun control or more rigorous screening of gun buyers. If they can't do that, then neither Obama or Romney deserves to be in the White House.

    July 23, 2012 at 2:59 pm |
  49. Paul in NC

    Romney is terrified of the NRA; Obama merely frightened. Doesn't anybody realize that 4 million people is a very small minority. I firmly believe that if the vast majority of normal people (i.e. not NRA members) were asked if they supported a ban on assault rifles, a ban on internet sales of any weapons or ammunition, and restrictions on the number of weapons anyone could purchase in a given time period there would be overwhelming support. Yes, I know this is a fantasy. It will never happen. "Real Americans" wouldn't stand for it.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:00 pm |
  50. Voicenithedesert/Troubledgoodangel

    Before we even talk about gun control we must reinstate the moral control! Since the Nation has abandoned the teaching of morality in public schools, entire generations of citizens have grown not knowing what is moral and what is not! Don't even think of giving guns to these people! This will quantuple the rates of murder and violence! It is not guns that kill the people, but the brains bereft of ethical discernment and the certainty of painful consequences for wrongdoing! Just look at the prisons in the U.S. because of the Dr. Spock idiocy and myriad of other idioces, the prisons in America are bursting at their seams!

    July 23, 2012 at 3:01 pm |
  51. Cliff Glass - Rego Park, New York

    It needs to be the first question asked of each candidate at every campaign appearance, press briefing, news conference, and Presidential debate
    Much the same as yelling fire in a crowded movie theatre is not a guaranteed 1st amendment right, are civilians owning military-style weapons, designed purely for mass killing, a guaranteed 2nd amendment right ?

    July 23, 2012 at 3:03 pm |
  52. Richard Oak Harbor, Wa

    If the anticipated gun control debate approaches a roar before the Presidential election each candidate should offer a Constitutional solution. Both Party's will inevitably proagandize the issue but ultimately such a potentially devisive topic should be left to a national vote on whether to have future gun owners obtain a safe gun use license similar to the New York State gun law.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:04 pm |
  53. Johan Ver Walensis

    The presidential candidates should comment, and make their positions known. They should not bang the issue like a cheap drum. To do so is more diversion from the biggest issues. If the candidates can't prioritize the issues in their campaigns, how will they prioritize in the oval office?

    July 23, 2012 at 3:05 pm |
  54. Jane in CA

    Both candidates should come out in support of assault weapons bans and bans on high capacity magazines. Put these weapons back in military hands where they will be used by trained and disciplined personnel.
    I would also like to see someone call out the NRA as being an accessory before the fact, for their tireless efforts to make sure that these massacres keep on happening in this country.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:06 pm |
  55. Cactus Pat in Wyoming

    The Colorado shootings make us more aware of guns in our society. I would like both major presidential candidates to take a stance on gun control. No flip-flopping or flim-flamming, and forsake your Etch-a-Sketch, Mitt. Tell it like it is.

    I was just a few miles away at the time of the shooting. The west has its own
    culture regarding guns, and I bet that goes for a lot of places. I have neighbors
    who are the kindest people and great neighbors, but they are afraid Obama is
    going to take away their guns. The President has not stated that, and Mitt hasn't
    said anything about it recently, so, yes -- President Obama and Mitt Romney need to take a stand on this issue in light of national gun violence.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:08 pm |
  56. JD in NH

    Gun control should be a significant campaign issue, but it won't be. Both sides are bought and paid for so we're left with the status quo. After every horrible event we have a flurry of talk about gun control. Sadly, it fades . . . until the next event. No one seems to want to answer the question – why does anyone need an assault rifle?

    July 23, 2012 at 3:08 pm |
  57. Johan Ver Walensis

    The British comic Eddie Issard said in his comedy routine, "Guns don't kill people, its the people putting ammo in the gun pulling the trigger that kills people." And hes right, what made it funny was its so true. Perhaps controlling the bullets is an argument worth pursuing. The Constitutional objections are about guns, not ammunition? We should hear the opinions of the presidential candidates; we should not allow them to go off point. They must expose their views on all relevant issues affecting society our society.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:10 pm |
  58. Earl Speigner Georgia

    It should play a big role, but it won't even be mentioned. Republicans (like Romney) who normally would support common-sense gun-control are afraid of being kicked out of the party. Democrats (like Obama) are too afraid of energizing pro-gun voters in purple states. But, they're not the only ones to blame. Since the Republican-dominated Supreme Court gutted gun-control laws (beginning in 2008), on the job law enforcement murders have hit record levels, year after year. Instead of reporting on those, the cowardly 'liberal media' spent the last year spreading the Darryl Issa/Republican/NRA—produced lie that 'gun walking' is at the root of the gun violence problems in the US and Mexico. The problem starts and ends with the availability of assault weapons and ammunition. Treating gun-related murders (of both law enforcement and civilians) in the US with the same weight as the two in Mexico might create the kind of outrage that would force politicians to address this problem.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:14 pm |
  59. Michael

    Jack ,Romney and Obama are cowards. They are afraid of the N.R.A. They both know that no one needs a assult
    rifle for hunting or home protection a hand gun or a shotgun are good enough. And selling magazines that hold forty or fifty rounds is insane. We the people need to say enough is enough and demand or State or local politcians do the right
    thing and ban assult rifles and limit the rounds a magazine holds. But alas Jack all our politcians are bought and paid for
    by the N.R.A. So nothing will get done and this nightmare will keep repeating it's self

    mike Largo Fl.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:15 pm |
  60. Dave, Orlando, FL

    None. There are more than enough gun laws, none of which mean anything to criminals and crazy people. Laws are only for honest, rational people, the rest of us will find a way to get guns or drugs or steal stuff or all three, regardless. Even if there were enough gun laws to completely fill the Library of Congress exclusively, the deviants among us will be undeterred. Besides, everywhere there are tight gun laws, there is a high crime rate and vice versa.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:20 pm |
  61. Frank Poynton from Los Angeles

    Unfortunately the term "gun control" has become an oxymoron right up there with "peace in the Middle East." Even a layman can tell you that the NRA has a grip on the Republican Party and in light of this tragedy it does not appear the GOP is eager back away from those supporters. The NRA has already stated that they are counting on short term memory about this devastating attack when voters go into the booth. "Gee that's bold."

    July 23, 2012 at 3:22 pm |
  62. Steve, Clifton, Virginia

    President Obama was used as a scare tactic during the 2008 elections and even though he never indicated that he would initiate stricter gun control policy there was a enormous run on gun sales and ammunition's. Therefore don't expect much more from Obama. Romney has flip flopped on the so much that even if he staked out a position, he would change it when he thought it advantageous. What would really make a difference during the 2012 Presidential and Congressional elections would be for someone to craft a pledge similar to the "no tax increases" pledge which stated that the person signing the pledge "committed to not support gun control legislation which was reflective of the wishes of the majority of U.S Citizens."

    July 23, 2012 at 3:24 pm |
  63. Texasgomer

    Since the NRA who has more blood on it hands than Osama Bin Laden ever hoped to have basically has bought and frightened Congress, nothing will be done.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:24 pm |
  64. eric

    I am less concerned with the guns jack, than I am the tear gas. Why haven't we heard about where and how he acquired such a thing!

    July 23, 2012 at 3:27 pm |
  65. Joe R.

    Hey Jack: Everyone is talking about gun control. What about Hollywood violent movie control? I mean the killer was copying a character from a movie. Hollywood uses guns all the time. In fact, Hollywood uses guns that are against the law. They use bazookas, bombs and other dangerous devices. What about we outlaw the use of guns in movies and tv as well. Because when guns are outlawed, only outlaws (and the movie industry) will have guns!!

    July 23, 2012 at 3:27 pm |
  66. Julia, Fayetteville, NC

    It should be a question in every debate they have. This topic can have as many questions as there will be debates. Ammunition, types of guns bought, type of protective gear bought, why should a person be able to purchase a gun/weapon that will fire more than 6 shells, was protective gear bought, and on and on. Every debate MUST have their thoughts on "guns".

    July 23, 2012 at 3:28 pm |
  67. Karl in Flint, MI

    It will get lip service from both sides, but we all know the NRA isn't going to let anything change. Their membership has more money then brains and until one of these heinous crimes happens at an NRA convention, forget about it. In politics, money always beats common sense.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:36 pm |
  68. Sandstone

    "None! There is enough to go at, and it would just create a stalemate-ridicule of your past oversea-battles. Most of which has already put our world on the defensive. But whoevere wins this election, will have to find a way to open more local neighborhood-armouries where those who feel the want to store weapons without keeping them at home where they can be stolen or their kids get their hands on them."

    July 23, 2012 at 3:37 pm |
  69. naksuthin

    "As for Romney, he signed an assault weapons ban as governor of Massachusetts but has since said he's against gun control. "

    Vote for Romney: The candidate without a spine.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:45 pm |
  70. Layne Alleman

    Jack, Little, if at all. Right now, both of these "gentlemen" need to focus on our nation as a whole, or this incident, as senseless and tragic as it is, will become all to common(check the murder rate in Chicago, for starts). I think your network would do well to compare rising poverty and increase in violent behavior. Layne A. aNTIOCH, iL.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:46 pm |
  71. Allan Hanson Placerville, ca

    Before you can stop these "nuts" that think they need assault weapons that are only manufactured to kill people, you have to stop the manufacture of them.
    AS long as they are manufactured they will fall into the wrong hands.
    As long as the NRA runs the country, nothing will be done.
    As usual nothing will come even after this massacure.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:48 pm |
  72. Jeff In Minnesota

    I have always wondered if assault rifles are legal, then why is assault still a crime? Seriously. If you cannot hit the broad side of a barn with a single shot, what makes you think you'll be any better with a semi-automatic rifle? In my very humble opinion, assault rifles and other military style weapons are legal because people with too little testosterone need to feel manly. From a former NRA Life Member who resigned and turned in my membership card because the NRA has forgotten its real mission.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:50 pm |
  73. Dave - Phx

    It's a dead/non issue. When over half of the electorate is made up of gun toting wannabe Rambo's who populate the NRA,gun laws have no chance of advancing. Well, hardly any laws period have any chance of advancing due to our do nothing Congress. Fake anger over Olympic uniforms, but none for the millions of Americans whose jobs were shipped overseas.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:51 pm |
  74. Brenda from Ontario, Canada

    I don't see where it should pay any part in the election.

    I will admit, I hate guns – any kind of guns. I deplore the fact that they are so readily available to anyone. I don't understand American's love for guns – I just don't get it! Canda has not escaped this type of violence – we just haven't reached the levels that the US has. But, let's get real here – guns are not the problem, people are the problem. If some lunatic wants to do harm, commit a horrific act of violence,he/she will find a gun, whether it be legal or illegal. If they can't get their hands on a gun they will use a knife, axe, or build a bomb.

    People are the problem ... so how do we fix the problem?

    July 23, 2012 at 3:57 pm |
  75. Frank Poynton from Los Angeles

    So some Democrats "think" Al Gore lost in 2000 because he supported gun control. News to me!!! Here I thought it was because of hanging chads and that whole Supreme Court decision thing. Anyone who thinks that law enforcement agencies are going to come into their home and pry their weapons out of their hands if any gun control laws are enacted are delusional.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:58 pm |
  76. rosie

    Anyone that tries to use gun control as a campaign issue risks more than they could possibly gain from not mentioning it at all. Surly they would lose any gun owner that had intended to vote for them. There are many more gun owners out here than most people realize. The NRA represents a very small proportion of gun owners. I am the only gun owner that I know who is actually a member of the organization.

    July 23, 2012 at 3:59 pm |
  77. John from Santa Maria, CA

    Like you said politically gun control is a lose-lose situation. But you forget, the gunman also made bombs how do you control that?

    July 23, 2012 at 4:00 pm |
  78. sarge

    My assault weapon rights are unassailable, and reflect my insecurity and sense of inadequacy!

    July 23, 2012 at 4:01 pm |
  79. Randy

    None, with widespread government corruption by the 1% and corporations I think every citizen should heavily arm themselves in the event of further erosion of constitutional rights by said oligarchs. It seems that after the shooting that the ones who squeaked loudest are the ones who actively work to deprive middle class and poor Americans of their rights. I guess if you have the audacity to tell underprivileged people to live in a 300 sq. Foot apt. While you live in a 12,600 sq. Foot home, you have the audacity to walk on the constitution.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:03 pm |
  80. ImALibertarian

    The framers just fought and won a war using nothing but privately owned weapons that were as advanced as the technology of the time, and they intended for citizens to be able to throw off the bonds of any future tyrant using the most modern weapons available. If anything, the political rhetoric should embrace the freedom that honest people deserve in order to protect themselves against aggression of any sort. However... that won't happen. Most people are afraid to take the responsibility for their own defense.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:06 pm |
  81. Johnny C (from Los Angeles)

    Hi Jack –

    I think one of the candidates will at least discuss this concern. It is an interesting issue. On one hand, I grew up a hunter and my father taught me how to use a weapon and to be cognizant of its proper usage to ensure that nobody would be accidentally hurt. I also agree in the 2nd amendment. The concern is how do you ensure that the "bad guys" do not get them and use it for mayhem?

    There is no easy answer ...

    July 23, 2012 at 4:06 pm |
  82. WiscBadger

    "Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not..." – Thomas Jefferson.
    "No free man shall ever be deprived the use of arms." Thomas Jefferson
    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson

    July 23, 2012 at 4:07 pm |
  83. Mike

    NONE! If anyone needs a weapon in this day an age it's the law abiding citizens of this Country. The President and his administration has created a mess with illegals, unemployment and increasing entitlements. All of this leads to a higher crime rate which we are experiencing at an alarming rate.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:07 pm |
  84. A Southern Lady - North Carolina

    Jack – Little or none. The NRA is very powerful within the Republican party, has a great deal of money and influence and would "take down" any Republican who offers any type of reasonable gun control. If you remember, during the 2008 election, there were Republican television ads saying that candidate Obama, if elected president, would "come and take your guns. " How the NRA can justify that anyone should have an assult rifle, a machine gun or a granade launcher is so far our of normal thinking that there is simply no explanation. The President knows the futility of trying to deal with any kind of gun control.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:08 pm |
  85. Cee.La

    The Founding Fathers never would have imagined the sophistication of the firearms of today......nor would they be very impressed with the nastiness of the NRA,...so nothing will be legislated in Congress concerning guns......because the NRA and the members of Congress who pay allegiance to them will see to it....

    July 23, 2012 at 4:08 pm |
  86. Marilyn from Powell, OH

    They can't say a thing about ANY kind of control because they would not want to upset Chuck Norris.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:08 pm |
  87. Mark in Houston

    It should be front and center. It wont be. If the NRA says "jump", Republicans ask..."how high". Democrats on the other hand display their cowardness by not saying anything that might jeopardize their re election.

    No immediate action by Congress will show that they are indeed cowards, holding the wishes of lobbyist above the safety of the voter.

    In my anger, I think it's a shame theatre nine wasn't filled with those elected officials who place their own power and greed above those they were elected to serve.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:09 pm |
  88. Ben from Boston

    If there were no guns, the shooter would probably have become a bomber or a gasser, Given Joker's penchant for laughing gas and the shooter's field of study, he might have used laughing gas laced with neural toxins. It could have been something a lot worse than guns. What we need are ways to find and defuse these guys before they go off. How evil! How very evil!

    July 23, 2012 at 4:09 pm |
  89. Mark W. Ellis


    For either candidate to push for saner gun laws would require the to actually regenerate the missing appendage between their legs!

    M. W. Ellis
    Groton, MA

    July 23, 2012 at 4:10 pm |
  90. Guest

    gun control only affects the average law abiding citizen. The crooks and crazies will still get them.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:10 pm |
  91. Guest

    The Gov;t cannot control guns-look at Fast and Furious.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:11 pm |
  92. John E


    Just like the other fringe issues like Abortion and Gay Marriage, Guns take a back seat to what pains everyone now, the jobs and the economy.

    If either of the two major candiates talk about it, it will be as part of a diversion tactic to avoid a topic about Jobs or the Economy.

    John E
    San Jose, CA

    July 23, 2012 at 4:11 pm |
  93. Eric - Houston

    None, it is another subject which the ideologues on both sides make it nearly impossible for anyone to have a measured discussion. Additionally, making decisions based on the emotion of the moment leads to bad policy in nearly all if not all cases. Part of all current attention is a result of natural sorrow, but much is due to a calculated "maybe I can sway the majority right now" opportunity and this should never be the basis for important decisions.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:12 pm |
  94. Jennifer M in Winnipeg

    What would 'gun control' have done specifically in this case, Jack? This guy legally purchased and registered the 4 guns and ammunition that he used. The only 'gun control' that would make any sense is to take 'the right to bear arms' out of the Constitution. That right was written in the dark ages and is not feasible in present day. This was an horrific tragedy and my heart goes out to all concerned. But this should play no role in the campaign.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:14 pm |
  95. Guest

    "Blaming guns for murder is like blaming forks for obesity."

    July 23, 2012 at 4:15 pm |
  96. rick

    I will support all candidates who campaign for strict gun control. Four million gun enthusiasts (with a fair share of nut cases) should never dictate their extremist views on the rest of us. I agree that deregulation of the gun industry is one problem amongst others.l Treating mental health as a physical illness is another. Does anyone else feel the the Second Amendment is open to interpretation other than the one by the NRA? I certainly do! I'll vote for Obama but he's been too meek on this issue.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:16 pm |
  97. John J. Grimes Watertown, Ma.

    It depends on who is in the audience. If the candidates are on the east or west coast, they will be anti-gun and the opposite will be the case when campaigning down south or in the midwest. I have been hearing these hollow promises since JFK and then Ronald Reagan were shot. The simple question is why is it so very easy to buy guns in some areas of this country with little oversight and yet so difficult in others?

    July 23, 2012 at 4:17 pm |
  98. Ralph Valle-Oakland, CA

    100 round assault rifles have no useful purpose in a mature society. Can't ban them all today but if some controls would keep 0nly a few from the wrong hands, lot's of lives could be spared.Maybe the tax code could be used to do that

    July 23, 2012 at 4:17 pm |
  99. Kim in GA

    A BIG ONE. This has to stop!

    July 23, 2012 at 4:18 pm |
  100. Anne

    I realize that it is a political landmine, however my answer is yes. Until we have a rational, sensible national dialogue about gun control, we will continue to see shootings in this country every day. Is this really the price we, as a country, want to pay to uphold the Second Amendment? There have been 17 Amendments added to the constitution since the original 10; changes made as society has changed and evolved for the better.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:20 pm |
  101. Gigi Oregon

    "Speak softly but carry a big stick" The United States is a very violent place to live. My grandchildren, nieces and nephews attended class one day in May 1998 never dreaming there would be a shooting and two students would be killed and over twenty wounded.The shooter's parents killed the day before. This past year we also lost a great police officer by a mentally unbalanced woman. We are a hunting and fishing community never dreaming that guns would be used for such a killing spree. With that said, it is no wonder myself and others in my community would like to see stricter gun laws. And stronger punishments for offenders.

    We are always eager and ready to kill and go to war over aliens harming our own. But when it comes to our citizens we seem to feel "over my dead body...they will have to take my guns over my cold, dead body". And so, we let it continue and each time we act so surprised, as if this never happens in America... Well it does and it did in Springfield Oregon. It's time to challenge our own laws and protect our country with the same vigor as we so quickly go to war after a alien harming one or more of our countrymen.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:20 pm |
  102. Larry in Houston

    In light of the Colorado shootings, what kind of role should gun control play in the presidential campaign?
    Answer : NONE, Period.
    Outlaws will always Have Guns – Only Outlaws will have guns – Guns don't shoot people, people shoot people, with their finger on a trigger – Imagine IF all of the Law Abiding & Innocent Citizens in this country that had to "give up" their guns / knives / and every ball bat / or anything that could kill someone. Imagine that . Who do You Think would Have all of those things ? Certainly it wouldn't be the people that are "law abiding" would it ?

    July 23, 2012 at 4:20 pm |
  103. sober

    None at all. This is a subject for sober reflection and it is going to be difficult to effect a change in one of the very few rights where the Constitution states "shall not be infringed". There are lots of arguments that start, "the founding fathers never envisioned" this and that, but what they clearly experienced and expected was that pretty much every citizen of the day did own guns which were, excepting for artillery, equal to and very often superior in capability than those held by regular military troops. Given the changes in weapons that had taken place in the preceding 200 years, it is laughable to suggest that these impressive intellects did not expect significant improvements to continue. I sate this just to illustrate the kind of issues and arguments we will have to reflect on. There are many and most are difficult.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:24 pm |
  104. manning

    Sadly for the victim and future victim none!

    July 23, 2012 at 4:25 pm |
  105. Jack

    It should be part of the debate but it won't for all the obvious reasons. The NRA has a gun to the head of American Common Sense. Most Americans do not want to ban all guns. Most of us want good regulations that work. Do we really need military style assault weapons on our streets? Even in the Armed Forces the use and possession of assault weapons is highly regulated. Why can't civilian society regulate firearms?

    July 23, 2012 at 4:25 pm |
  106. deborah ballweg Seibert, co

    None. All gun control advocates want is for the public to be unarmed, vulnerable and unable to protect themselves ie Germany and Mexico

    July 23, 2012 at 4:28 pm |
  107. coco

    I am with Brad from Portland. I used to be a Mental Health Worker and I work in downtown DC. Some people out there are truly disturbed. We see the signs but dont choose to address them. However, some can appear to be normal and exhibit psycho and sociopathic tendencies but because they have a "clean record" or they appear to be normal we dont investigate and besides, you know if President Obama mentions guns they go crazy. He has did nothing with guns his whole presidency and they are slaying him over guns. Why don't you ask Etch a Sketch what he would do. Thats the one we have no clue from one second to the next what is about.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:28 pm |
  108. Jim, Cranford NJ

    Unfortunately the candidates will be running away from the gun control debate faster than a speeding bullet.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:29 pm |
  109. JDinHouston

    The NRA has successfully scared the heck out of the majority of Americans with their naïve and overly simplistic "if we outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns." The killings will continue, we'll be shocked, but nothing will change. My real fear is that more people will start carrying guns and we'll start seeing wannabe heroes gunning down innocent people.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:31 pm |
  110. Cindy from Temecula, CA

    Jack, you'll see the trend immediately! Those from NY, NJ, IL, etc are positive that Gun Control is a majority opinion... I'd add CA into that list but I support the 2nd Amendment. If everyone was armed that night (as Switzerland arms & trains their citizens) chances are this criminal would've stuck to bombs. He knew he was walking into a Gun Banned Facility – it was like shooting fish in a barrel, folks. We need to lock up the mentally ill & criminals and as for common citizens: get a gun legally and LEARN HOW TO USE IT CORRECTLY. Thanks, Jack for letting me air my two cents.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:32 pm |
  111. rosie

    No one of the gun control crowd has ever been able to tell me how they would confiscate all the guns in this country without causing thousands of deaths. I will ask again – how do you control the guns we already have and prevent gun crimes in America?

    July 23, 2012 at 4:33 pm |
  112. Osilama Abu from Ontario,Canada

    Hi Jack,

    America is the only country in the world,where you buy Guns as if you were buying snacks.The politicians and citizens do not see reason to discuss the impact -gun violence is haveing on the society,because of the campaigns by a morally bankrupt NRA who believe in making money,rather than saving souls.
    How much damage do these unregulated culture have to do, before reason prevails?

    July 23, 2012 at 4:33 pm |
  113. James

    Years back after the Columbine shooting there was a bunch of legeslation that broughtabout the so called "assult rifle" ban. That had nothing to do with crime control and alot to do with gun controle. The american people basicly used the voting record for it as a voting guide to vote people out. I believe the term (Sacrafised on the alter of gun controle) was used.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
  114. Ralph Valle-Oakland, CA

    Main weapon when 2nd amndmt passed was a muzzle loading, single shot musket. Founders could not even imagine a muilti-shot revolver and a 100 round assault rifle would have been pure science fiction

    July 23, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
  115. Patricia Frederick

    None at all. This is Congresses job and the President can only suggest his wishes to the House & Senate. But discussed by the Congress, yes. What are they waiting for? Does one of their children or grandchildren need to be kill by some nut job with an assault weapon before they are? Gun violence in this country is out of hand. We might as well be living in the Wild West of 1800's. There also should be more attention paid to mental health. Why didn't it raise a red flag when this nut ordered 6,000 rounds of ammo on line? This is sick and the seller should be brought up on charges as well.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
  116. Rae Ann Pointer

    If we got rid of every single gun in the world, will there be no more killing? Why not?

    July 23, 2012 at 4:35 pm |
  117. Dude

    Until the government has stronger measures for dealing with the mentally ill and the evil among us, we the people continue to need guns. There are more important questions to address. How can we as a society identify people with mental illness and deal with them appropriately in order to preclude them gun ownership, heal them, and ensure they do not end up on a murderous path? A gun range owner identified that Holmes had issue and denied him gun range membership. Holmes parents also knew that their son had issues. What resources were available to intervene with this young man once issues were raised?

    July 23, 2012 at 4:36 pm |
  118. Nick

    None. Lets be honest here, The GOP is bought and paid for by the NRA so don't expect anything there. If Pres. Obama were to present any gun legislation it would be political suicide so nothing is going to happen there. I have been a gun owner and shooter for sixty five years but I don't support the NRA anymore though I was a member for many years. Trying to ban guns in the U.S. is a lost cause but a lot could be done to make it more difficult for someone to commit mass murder as we have seen in recent years. So called ( assualt weapons) semiautomatic mllitary style rifles are not the problem but large capacity magazines are. So are hellfire triggers and other devices that permit the rifle to operate in an automatic way. Target shooters and hunters don't need 100 round drum magazines but the NRA refuses to compromise on anything that makes common sense and the politicians are terrified of them. They might lose their jobs. If the NRA does not wake up and work with congress to fix some of the obvious problems and if congress won't accept the fact there are millions of us gun owners that are not going to back down and surrender our firearms it could get ugly. The key words here are compromise and common sense.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:39 pm |
  119. Claudia, Houston, Tx

    I don't think gun laws should play any part in the campaign but then again it may come into play depending on which candidate is losing.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:39 pm |
  120. Peter, Tarrytown, N.Y

    Romney should strongly support the repeal of the 2nd amendment. If Republicans win the W.H. and both houses of congress the give away's to the wealthly coupled with the dismantleing of out social safety nets proposed by republicans could result in an armed insurrection..

    July 23, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
  121. Obama is a joke

    As for gun controls. I'm not quite sure of the details surrounding this guy's miniature arsenal and how he got hold of it so can't really comment. Personally speaking, I would be more determined to get a carry permit if I didn't have one already

    July 23, 2012 at 4:42 pm |
  122. Annie, Atlanta

    It should be an issue. it won't be. We live in a country where one group of well monied and powerful people insure that just about anyone can buy an assault weapon and go out and take out dozens of people in minutes, and that's ok with our politicians.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:42 pm |
  123. David

    The only way to get any action on gun control would be to have some nut open fire at an NRA convention and kill 40-50 people. And I not even sure that would bring people to their senses.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:46 pm |
  124. Chance

    Thousand die of cancer every day but that's ok , why aren't people screaming for a cure

    July 23, 2012 at 4:46 pm |
  125. Gary

    You cannot stop this kind of violence, only control it. This is a people issue. Time will show that there were telltale signs and either the government watchdogs failed or people chose to look the other way. More gun control will not solve this problem. Finding ways to keep all types of weapons out of the hands of crazies is the more effecive approach. Most imporantly, it's our community that must be engaged and serve as the watchful ears and eyes for authorities. Case in point – 90 boxes arrive at the school for a single student and nobody thinks to question it?

    July 23, 2012 at 4:47 pm |
  126. Jack - Lancaster, Ohio

    Mr. Cafferty:

    It is a presidential election, a special one, and since the voters in this country get a chance to make a difference, it will be a roll....of the dice.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:48 pm |
  127. justinstl

    Gun control is not the answer. Hitler was for gun controll and you saw what happened after he rounded up all the guns.
    We need More citizens to have guns with a conceal and carry permit so the criminals will think twice before commiting crime.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:52 pm |
  128. John Allen

    Over the past several years I have been looking for an "Excuse" to drop my life membership in the NRA because of what I see as their unwillingness to work with people who might have some rational suggestions as to how to deal with the profileration of firearms in America. My guess is that their response will motivate me to finally follow through. I'll miss the monthly "American Rifleman" publication but figure I'll find another source of technical information.

    July 23, 2012 at 4:53 pm |
  129. chuck from NJ

    As long as the NRA is lining the pockets of every politician in D.C. no real reform will ever take place. You ask where is my proof to back up my claim?
    One of their own Gabby Gifford was shot....If that wasn't enough to motivate the House and Senate on gun reform then what chance do you think 61 people in middle america getting shot is going to do. Yeah both sides will talk about gun control but trust me thats all it'll be is talk. While we here in the blogs fight amongest ourselves the members of the House and Senate are laughing all the way to the bank with monies from the NRA. But less they forget about another little document The Declaration of Independence and apparently so have WE THE PEOPLE

    July 23, 2012 at 4:54 pm |
  130. Marty Bee

    Presidents and wanna-be presidents can not afford to show common sense, backbone, nor decency. Big Brother and the mad hatter are throwing em a tea party, don'cha know?

    July 23, 2012 at 4:54 pm |
  131. AB

    The gun control issue should play a large role in the 2012 Presidential campaign. This is a major public safety issue and both President Obama and candidate Mitt Romney should publicly address this issue by formulating policies that will enhance public safety and at the same time, preserve the rights of responsible gun owners. Neither politician should avoid this issue. Community safety and order are one of the prime responsibilities of the U.S. President. Members of Congress should also be addressing this issue instead of avoiding it. But ultimately, the American people should be addressing this issue and holding political leaders responsible on all levels of government.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
  132. Al

    We should continue to protect candidates against the danger of being shot. Not lets talk about the future of the nation and what candidates are proposing to strengthen the economy and strengthen our nation.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:04 pm |
  133. Rev. Dana Grooms, Los Angeles

    Gun control would be an issue for a President already in their 2nd term. The smart move is to focus on Mental Healthcare Issues and getting help to those who are capable of commiting these kinds of acts.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:06 pm |
  134. Phyllis Reed

    Phyllis from New Jersey –
    The need for leadership is obvious, and given the majority of Americans want to see assault weapons banned, magazine capacities limited, and the gun show loophole closed, and with the support by police nationwide for these measures, I'm praying that enough Americans will speak up, contact the candidate of their choice and say this is what we want – don't run from the NRA anymore! Governors need to support social services and mental health clinics in all our cities and on our college campuses. It's time to recognize the cost of cynicism and weakness.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:06 pm |
  135. lakotahope

    Why have gun control? Who's going to follow the law and obey what "new laws" are put forth for the American citizen? You aren't going to be able to regulate crazy people, career criminals, and those who will not follow the law. No one can regulate illegal drugs–why even try to do this is beyond logic at this point too.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:08 pm |
  136. Barbara

    It's really sad that we have stricter rules for voting than for buying an assault weapon and 6000 rounds of ammo.

    Just look at all the people in this country with paranoia (a mental illness) and think they have to buy more and more in case someone makes them illegal. We live with a bunch of delusional nuts in this country. Just listen.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:08 pm |
  137. thom richer

    Face it, America. There is no gun "control" in the U.S.. The NRA (No Regard for Americans) is too powerful and Congress, all of them, is too spineless to really control arms in America for fear of losing their cushy seats. Guns are "out of control" in the U.S. and always will be due to our acceptance of unending wars and our glorification of war and violence via the media. We are raising our children to enjoy and embrace violence through video games, movies and TV and politics. This is no accident or coincidence. Like it or not, admit it or not, it is a fact, Jack. War is money and control of the population.

    Thom Richer
    Negaunee, MI

    July 23, 2012 at 5:09 pm |
  138. jollymeus

    It is unlikely that this will be debated any further in the political world. The American people have to voice their concerns to congress and the President. Why would they enact any legislation for change when the American people do not support it? It is the responsibility of the American people to voice their concerns and support gun control measures.

    By not enacting gun control legislation, individuals like the Colorado shooter are empowered. They continue to have access to assault weapons and large amounts of ammunition. We cannot control anyone’s mental state but we can control what is made available to them. Will this prevent all crimes involving guns? Not likely, but we will have fewer of these incidents.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:14 pm |
  139. Darin

    This is bigger than passing some laws, the NRA is too powerful a lobby. Therefore, the NRA has to be discredited and corruption needs to be rooted out within the NRA. THen maybe something might be able to get done to have some sense of safety. The all or nothing approaches from both sides is simply dysfunctional.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:14 pm |
  140. pat in michigan

    It should play no role.
    but hey let's go to war. what do you think.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:16 pm |
  141. Maddy Camili

    They should leave our guns alone. If someone decides to go on a spree, everyone with concealed weapons should pull their guns out and take care of the issue. Obama and Romney both know we love our guns!

    July 23, 2012 at 5:18 pm |
  142. vicky

    In my opinion, the Second Amendment to the Constitution is been misinterpreted. Militia to keep us secure in our homes. Also, we need to stop damaging people's brain with childhood vaccinations.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:18 pm |
  143. Boomer in Mo

    No point in either candidate addressing it. The NRA is in charge of the decision and will buy whatever laws they want. I'm a gun owner and a hunter but do not belong to the NRA and never will. The NRA is perhaps one of the most corrupt organizations in America, and that is saying something.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:19 pm |
  144. Matt from Michigan

    Was it playing a role before? No. To have it play a role now is to politicize a tragedy. A tragedy that would have happened regardless of the gun control laws. All he had on his record was a speeding ticket.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:19 pm |
  145. PiedType

    The insanity has to end. Your right to own a gun is no greater than my right to go to a theater without fear of getting shot by a heavily armed psycho. Both candidates should come down hard on the side of greater gun control!

    Susan R
    Denver, CO

    July 23, 2012 at 5:19 pm |
  146. Enraged

    As long as we have evil and I mean pure EVIL organizations like the NRA, and there are enough paranoid, gullible people, we have no chance of having a sensible gun policy that bans individuals from owning assault rifles with extended magazines.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
  147. Vance, Savannah, Georgia

    The Presidential Campaign should address Nut control-we have surveillance via Homeland Security over everyone, why not these nuts?? This guy had numerous recorded purchases of Guns, could have been on the Radar and stopped or held as a terrorist by Homeland Security. Gun Control over criminal gangs–hey Chicago needs that and these high powered weapons have no legal basis to be on the streets. The NRA Patriot Patrol has enough to protect themselves and America.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
  148. Elliot

    Gun control does not prevent gun crime. Even if the US reenacted the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, people will still obtain guns. It's just like Reagan's War on Drugs all over again. Same idea, different circumstances.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
  149. Daniel

    None, until gun control is addressed on the federal level it will not matter. Gun control at the state level will not work if they are able to obtain firearms across the border. Furthermore the bombs made can all be made by materials purchased at Home Depot so are you going to ban those items as well?

    July 23, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
  150. Chris in South Florida

    Absolutely NONE. You can't stop insane crazy and no gun control would have stopped this freak. With all the problems this country is facing, we don't have time to waste right now on gun control. Too much wasted time and energy and it won't really solve any BIG problems like Jobs and the economy and world debt and so forth.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
  151. 10n84w

    If stricter gun control laws wouldn't really prevent a madman from obtaining weapons and committing a massacre if so inclined, then someone explain how TSA patting us down in airport lines will somehow prevent the next terrorist from hijacking a plane? Oh yeah, that's right. It won't.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
  152. Kari

    Guns are not the issue here. Even if guns were outlawed entirely, a black market would emerge, and the people who were determined to commit such vile crimes would find a way to get their hands on the guns and fulfill their sick desires. This is not an issue of gun control but of mental health. Let's treat the person not the instrument.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
  153. Sebastian

    Gun control did not stop Anders Breivik from his shooting in Norway.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:20 pm |
  154. Richard

    It should play an important role. If stricter gun control only saves one life, it is well worth it. Mr. Romney is being hypocritical after the law he signed in Mass.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
  155. George

    Gun control. That's a real bugaboo for the politicos. If you think taking away the guns from millions of people, think about what might have been the outcome if ONE person in that audience had a concealed weapon permit and was carrying a weapon that night. The outcome might have been greatly different. I think it was 'policy' of that particular to ban weapons in the theater. Maybe that's why it ws chosen by that maniac. I have a permit and if I was there, the police would have been picking up one other body, that of the shooter.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
  156. Bruce in northeast Nevada

    My biggest fear is that Obama will say nothing now, then when he is re-elected (assuming he is), he will declare war on guns and gun owners.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
  157. Martha Campbell

    Absolutely. But why does it have to be all or nothing. Why can't we have a ban on assault weapons for those not in the military or police force. Everyday citizens have no business buying assault weapons. And we should also take away access to ammunition for those who already own them.

    Jamestown, PA

    July 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
  158. Jeff Santa Monica

    Gun control should play a part in the Presidential Campaign, but it won't because neither candidate has enough courage to take on the all powerful NRA gun lobby. Assault weapons and high capacity magazines shouldn't be owned by anyone but law enforcement or military. Gun "Nuts" are called that for a reason.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
  159. Ann Dykstra

    Why does anyone, other than those in the military, need an assault weapon? Thankfully his jammed, or the carnage would have been even worse.
    At least ban assault weapons!!

    July 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
  160. Sandy Clifton

    I'm sure that the shootings will not have an impact on the gun control debate in this election because it would have to be raised by Obama, and Obama will stay far from any such debate, depite his personal agenda to the contrary. Why? Because he doesn't want to face real questions about Fast and Furious. Chicago style politics reigns....

    July 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
  161. Issac

    Isaac, Rosamond California

    A tragedy like this should spark a vigorous debate on gun control. The victims deserve that. However, I believe that local governments should look at their individual situations and make laws accordingly. I do not believe gun laws should be enacted at the federal level. Its a non-issue in the election.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
  162. Sagebrush Shorty

    Chicago stands out as the perfect example of just how well gun laws really work.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
  163. Sue Silverman

    Gun control does not necessarily mean a ban. There should be a central registrar on gun and ammunition purchases. When someone like Holmes buys such a large amount of guns and ammunition in such a short time and there is no history of him being a sportsman (?) or collector such a number of purchases should raise a red flag. Seems to me all such tragedies are committed with legally bought guns which raises another question. Could it be these people don't want to do anything illegal such as buying arms illegally and then getting caught before their mission is accomplished.
    When the right to bear arms was written the types of ammunition we have today was not in existence.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
  164. Bert K. in L.A.

    Hi Jack, I do not believe gun control is a presidential issue; it is an issue for every membner of Congress and those seeking to be a member of Congress. They should explain to their voters what their understanding of the first words of the Second Amendment mean. Specifically, what do the words "A well regulated" mean in the beginning of the sentance "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,..."

    July 23, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
  165. Woody

    Gun control should focus on enforcing existing laws. Laws that limit the ability of Americans to own or purchase guns should be eliminated completely. Laws that limit access to ammunition should be eliminated. Any law that requires registration of a firearm should be repealed. Americans value freedom and that includes the freedom to own and operate firearms. It is already illegal to shoot innocent people that are watching a Batman movie in a public theater. Gun control won't fix stop anyone that wants to violate that law.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
  166. Dave Parker

    Look at how to help mentally ill people not how to ban guns.



    July 23, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
  167. Newton

    Jack, what would really amaze me is a conversation at the Presidential level that would address the minds of violence, not the mode. They could call it "Crime Control".......
    They have as much chance of keeping killing modes out of the hands of violence prone individuals as they do counting the number of stars in the sky.....sure its possible, but at what cost?


    July 23, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
  168. Jeff OTMG

    It is a non-issue. There has been a continuing drop in firearm related violence despite the fact that there are now 49 states with some form of concealed carry and fewer restrictions on firearms in general since 1995. Less control, less crime. One anomoly of the mass murder of 12 in Colorado justifies more gun control. Today, 14 out of 23 riding in a pickup truck in Texas have died in an accident. MORE than in the Colorado shooting, but there is no call to ban pickup trucks. The US has an incredibly low murder rate in spite of the large number of firearms present in the population. The guns are not causing problems. The largest mass murders in the US have been the attacks on 9/11, the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City, even a fire in club in Brooklyn that killed 80 people was done with a can of gasoline. Guns are an inefficient way to kill a lot of people. Even the Nazis figured that out.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
  169. Jim

    If there were a way to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and potentially dangerous people I would support it. However, laws harassing otherwise law abiding citizens are useless and a a waste of government time and money. There are hundreds of millions of gun owners in this country that never bother anyone. Don't bother them.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
  170. John Caldwell

    This presidential election is not about guns and what happened in Aurora will have no effect on the outcome.
    Why would you even ask such a question?
    I know you are not stupid and I can't understand why you are concerned about how a horrible tragedy somehow fits in to th politics of the upcoming presidential election.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
  171. Paul

    None. Our president's opinion doesn't matter because our constitution gives us our right to own guns.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
  172. Mike

    Hi Jack. While gun control is a key issue, how about addressing the gun and other violence in movies and video games that our children play and watch. I'm guessing that the Aurora CO shooter was influenced by the Batman movie. I suspect if you were to study the crazies that commit these attrocities you'd see a pattern of violent movie watching and/or video game playing. Do you think Hollywood would step up to the plate???

    July 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
  173. Jon in Tempe, Arizona

    Well Jack there is the issue of like you said what SHOULD be the role of gun control and what reality is. Gun control should be debated vigorously but the reality is that it will not be because of all the lobbying activities of the NRA. No one wants to offend the NRA so even supporters of gun control will not bring up the issue. If you think about it, the NRA has more of a money base to pull from because there is lots and lots of money in the sale and manufacture of guns. Gun manufacturers and retailers can donate lots of money so they will have lots of cash. Unfortunately, gun control does not have much of a money base because there is no money to be made in controling guns. This is another illustration of why we need some serious campaign finance reform in this country.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
  174. LaShaunta Waller

    Are we been realistic here? Often time during a series of negative events we all want to put blame and we want to have a understanding as to why things are the way they are. Can we really blame our President for what happen in Co. or any other state because it's not apart of his campaign. When President Obama entered into the white house the state of the us was very much in distress. Is that his fault as well? When do we as a country began to be accountable for our actions and our negligence in our finances and anything else within our control. Or is that the Presidents fault as well?

    July 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
  175. D. Wilson

    Gun control is not the issue. It is the media who go on and on about these sick individuals. Almost daring another sick person to try a top this sick act. Who about allowing more citizen to protect themselves, with receproical concealed carry. I would dare say if there had been a few armed citizens in the crowd the loss of inocent lives would have been lower and we would not have to waste money to try and convict this sick person, or some slick lawyer getting him off on an insainity plea
    D. Wilson St. Louis MO

    July 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
  176. Jeremiah

    I think gun control should be keeping it out of the hands of people with a domestic record but when someone goes to buy a gun/weapon, yes they do a background check but I think even though it may cost money they should have them do a psych test or something to that extent. Even a situation test that asks questions like what one person would do in a certain situation. That then would not affect our second addmendment the right to bare arms but it would be keeping the guns/weapons at a safe haven where only people knowing why they are doing and who are aware are allowed to have them. Here in Wyoming we are allow to carry without a consealed permitt. But the gun stores also are very careful when it comes to buying a gun.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
  177. KD16

    There is no better time to talk about control than now. There are too many massacres that occur in this country and there is no reason anyone besides a federal official should own an assault weapon, just the name indicates its purpose; assault. I have no problem with people owning hand guns for self defense purposes but a weapon that can fire over 100 rounds in under a minute is completely unnecessary and irresponsible. The topic of
    Gun control needs to be at the forefront of this presidential rate in order to prevent anymore tragedies to occur in this country.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
  178. Ray Victory

    Vero Beach, FL
    The conventional wisdom would hold that neither candidate would confront the gun owners, the NRA and the gun nuts. In a rational world the obvious first step is the banning of all assault rifles and related equipment. If you think that will happen please see me about purchasing a bridge in Brooklyn.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
  179. frank dileo

    Citizens have just as much a right to own cars as they do guns. If some idiot decides to mow down people on a busy street by running them over would we need tougher laws on owning cars? If you make it harder for citizens to get guns then they will be out gunned by criminals who will find a way to get them. Legal possession of firearms serves as a deterent to these criminals.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
  180. Christian

    None. In this case guns were a means to an end Holmes was clearly determined to carry out. Let's not forget that this guy bobby trapped his home with explosives. If he was unable to purchase those guns, he may have decided to blow the theater up killing who knows how many more people. Guns aren't the problem...we are.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
  181. jkrizan

    The Second Ammendment gaurantees us as citizens the right to bear our own privately owned arms. It does not, however, gaurantee us the right to own military-style assault weapons, or to even own weapons when we are not mentally capable of doing so. With that in mind, regulations governing private citrizen gun ownership should be "restrictive" enough to further prevent assault weapons from hitting our streets, and also to further prevent those deemed mentally incapable from legally obtaining any weapon. In their essence, regulations like these do not infringe on our Second Ammendment rights. While stiffer regulations will not prevent future trageties, they can reduce the likelyhood of their occurance. We simply have to do something.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
  182. Rob Centerburg Ohio

    None, the economy is the #1 issue. However, what knucklehead are allowing automatic assault weapons on the streets? The idiots at the NRA are so narrow minded they cannot see that there in no need to have these weapons on the street.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
  183. Charles Carswell

    Jack, The only way to control guns and keep them out of the hands of depraved people is to simply take all guns out of existence. Not banning guns or outlawing them, but remove them form existence.
    But the gun lobbies will not let anything like that happen, so they will always be here and sick people, sane people an all else will always have access to them.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
  184. Jimmy, NYC

    Unfortunately, neither candidate has the gumption to take on the NRA. The only political solution is for a concerted, organized effort by all the city mayors, state governors, police chiefs and victims families, to band together and expose all the politicians who are bought and sold by NRA lobbyists and make them pay at the polls this November.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
  185. Scooter

    Jack, Sadly it will have no effect. You can count the number of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty but only one Boarder agent will be remembered for the political gain of the NRA lovin Republican party. They will say 13 people died last night in a Ford F-250, should we outlaw Fords? The fact is no one has the empathy and brain cells to appriciate the effect of guns. We wont to make abortion illegal but its a tragity that children and parents are killed by weapons. Two Things make America Alcohol and Guns.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
  186. Michael Christian

    The candidates should promise to put in action post election a system that tracks the kind of purchase trends the a potential mass murderer's stockpiling efforts. The same way your FICO drops if you have too many inquiries or newly opened credit, this technology that ALREADY exists to protect banks, should be adapted to trigger alerts to authorities if you buy one tenth of all the different arsenal items this suspect had, especially if acquired in a short period of time. Bullet proof vest? 6000 .223 caliber military hunting rounds? a drum 100 shot magazine? Really? It should be put in place, but I bet the NRA would block that effort.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
  187. Sean from Thousand Oaks, CA

    Well,what kind of role should it play? Even the most ardent pro-gun people should acknowledge that a nut shouldn't be able to walk down to a store, buy a 100-round automatic rifle and multiple other firearms along with thousands of rounds of ammo and body armor. What role will it play? None. Remember Pamela Gorman, the Congressional candidate who released an ad of her blasting away with a Tommy Gun? Guns are a fixation, an obsession for many Americans, and millions of them will view efforts to eradicate weapons meant that shot hundreds of rounds a minute as an encroachment on a right that was written when guns fired one shot and required 15 seconds to reload. The gutless chickens in government will do nothing but appease these people.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
  188. Greg

    Jack, if you are going to challenge the President, why don't you state YOUR position?
    Or are ratings (like votes) all important?

    July 23, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  189. Ryan W. Ontario,CA

    Its sad how the media would rather put the guns on trial and declare the shooter insane. It doesnt matter how many laws you pass the bad guys will always find a way to hurt people. The only thing more gun control will do is make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves, and make it easier for criminals to committ crimes.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  190. Elliot

    Gun control does not prevent gun crime. Even if the US reenacted the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, people will still obtain guns. It's just like Reagan's War on Drugs all over again. Same idea, different circumstances.

    (Clarksville, MD)

    July 23, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  191. Michael

    The National Assault Rifle Assocition (NRA) needs to wake up and see what's happening with all these killings being committed by people that can get their hands on assault type weapons. The 2nd Amendment basically was meant for people to have firearms that were member of a well-REGULATED militia, not for people to go around committing murder or forming so-called "partriotic" militia groups.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  192. James Etheridge

    Nothing Jack criminals don't follow any laws.

    James Etheridge
    Wilson, NC

    July 23, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  193. Shane from North carolina

    I don't think it should play a role at all Jack, I think the candidates should focuse more on fixing the economy. Don't get me wrong, I hate what happen in Colorado as much as the next guy but it's not gonna help this country if we worry about gun control more than anything else.
    P.S. Please post my comment

    July 23, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  194. Anthony - Broomfield, CO

    Here in Colorado, there are conceal/carry laws that allow people to bring weapons onto college campuses. Perhaps these laws should be expanded to include other places, considering that criminals and otherwise malicious people won't pay attention to any legislation designed to limit access to these weapons. There will always be the black market trade of arms, and maybe the best we can do is to ensure that decent, responsible people have the ability to defend themselves and the otherwise helpless. As for the presidential campaign, I can't see either candidate touching the issue, and for good reason. Such a divisive concept would only drive votes away from anyone attempting to take a particular stance.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  195. Steve

    Some supporters of Gun Rights have said that there should have been someone there to shoot back. If other people in the theater started shooting back – just imagine the chaos. Besides the fact that this guy was wearing body armor. The shooter had a 100 round magazine for the assault weapon, Its nuts that he has access to that kind of fire power. Why is it that when the second amendment is discussed by the pro gun people, or anybody, that the first line of the second amendment is not acknowledged. " A Well Regulated Militia being necessary ......." So ... what has happened to the " Well Regulated " part of the second amendment ???

    Not my words, or some socialist ... The words of the Founding Fathers ... and according to the Tea Party Types, the Founding Fathers were, and are absolute !! So, lets Regulate !

    Steve, Colorado

    July 23, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  196. Matthew Sambolin in Brooklyn, NY

    The presidential campaign normally is always full of unfilfilled promises – on gun control, the only real thing that can be done is to tighten the existing laws, making lawful gun owners go through stricter background investigation processes; however, guns are plentiful and will always be passed along through black market and back alleys of America. This is unfortunately an ongoing problem – laws will make legal ownership a bit harder, but won't hinder criminals from getting them by other means. A criminal will always be a criminal with bad intentions.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:26 pm |
  197. buckdharma1

    I don't think gun control shoud even be an issue in the Presidential race. More gun laws will never help. Look at the killings at schools, its already Illegal to have a gun on campus. Feel good laws are only for the people who belive they will help. Its illegal to kill someone, can't enforce the laws allready on the books.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:26 pm |
  198. David Blough, Sr

    >There needs to be a better way to screen the purchasers of guns, Not just some gun seller at a fair booth, or garage sale or outdated gun-shop. These guys can't get any other kind of job so they become like lot Lizards, scrounging out an existence without regard for the well being of others. If an individual purchasing a (assault rifle, hand gernades, etc) here in the United States....what's the expected outcome. These are weapons of War, not self protection.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:26 pm |
  199. Denise, Oklahoma

    Although our current gun policies do not protect the law-abiding citizen, it probably will not be an issue for this election. Aurora is a sad commentary on how the govenrment has naively produced "gun free zones" that become "fish bowls" for the crinimal element. Gun control is another polarizing issue in this country - which is the last thing we need in the election year. The focus needs to remain on jobs and the economy!

    July 23, 2012 at 5:26 pm |
  200. Bob Thomson - Southfield, MI

    It would be a blessing to hear Obama and Romney agree that all assault weapons should be banned. Existing owners should be required to register their weapons and failure to do so should require that the weapon be confiscated and destroyed. It is a sad day in our history when the NRA has enough clout to scare our politicians away from doing what is best for the American people. Maybe we ought to allow guns and ban bullets!

    July 23, 2012 at 5:26 pm |
  201. Brian from Nevada

    Forget gun control, rather incentivise concealed carry. This would lead to more of a situation similar to that of the US Marshal's and airplanes. If more citizens were properly trained and armed, how many criminals would double think committing crimes because they never would never know who would be armed? One carefully placed bullet to the head of the shooter could have ended the massacre early in Colorado.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:26 pm |
  202. Dino Kadich

    I still cringe every time I drive by the hunting store Jared Loughner bought a pistol and a number of extended magazines in, completely legally. The Assault Weapons Ban would've prevented the purchase of the extended magazine, as well as Holmes's purchase of the semi-automatic AR-15. We can't catch every mentally-disturbed person in time, but there's no reason why we shouldn't be taking steps to make sure that weapons of mass murder are not available easily. It may be politically unpopular, but both major presidential candidates should come out in favor of restoring the Assault Weapons Ban.
    Dino Kadich, Tucson, AZ

    July 23, 2012 at 5:26 pm |
  203. John Gustafson

    The discussion should not center around gun control nor the NRA's apparent lack of concern over the rash of gun deaths in the United States. The Presidential candidates should attempt to answer the following question: How had the United States arrived at the stage in its history where there are almost as many guns as there are people causing it to be one of the most violent nations in the world? Are we at the point where we should remove the olive branch from the Emblem of the United States?

    July 23, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
  204. Brad in TX

    It should play a prominent role if we care at all about public safety. It probably won't, because like every other controversal issue the politicians don't have the fortitude to address gun control head on. They care more about being in the good graces of the NRA than doing their jobs and ensuring public safety.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
  205. John D

    Gun control should have abso-freaking no role in the presidential election. Gun laws should be the domain of the states except where transport across state lines is involved.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
  206. Terry

    Appropriate debate should include gun control along with all America's issues. That being said, the second amendment will always survive as long as America does or we won't be America anymore!
    Terry S.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
  207. gg canada

    any body that feels they have to have a assault rifle to FEELsafe is allready nuts.then they say keep the guns away from the crazies. how cam you do that if they can walk into a gun shop and buy them

    July 23, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
  208. Nathan

    This should be a non issue in the presidential debate. What if a law abiding, trained armed citizen had been in that theater? They could have easily taken care of this crazy person and saved countless lives. I speak from first hand experiences, having a gun in a life threatening situation and using this firearm for law abiding purposes is what should be discussed by the media.
    Why does nobody discuss the law abiding citizen, Mr. Samual Williams in Ocala, FL. that was armed and protected countless patrons in the internet cafe using his concealed carry gun. Not one innocent was hurt in that action due to the fast actions, thinking and training of Mr. Williams.
    Movie theaters typically post signs on doors, frowning upon the carrying of firearms into the movie theaters. Had a "good guy" had a pistol, it would have ended instead, innocent victims scramble for their lives in fear. Gun control debates are not worth it. Criminals and Sociapaths do not regard the law.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
  209. Steve H

    If a psychopath wants a gun, chances are he or she will probably be able to get one if they are that determinted regardless of how strict the gun laws are... but I bet if we did have more strict gun laws there would have been a lot less than 71 people shot. No one needs an assault rifle other than law enforcement period!

    July 23, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
  210. Jordan from Hughesville, PA

    Gun reform WITH politics? Talk about an oxymoron! This election needs to focus on the mass number of americas that are homeless, jobless and without prospects. Tragedies will continue throughout the course of humanity, it's just a part of life. What we need most is a social reform. One where we humble ourselves, serve and help each other reguardless of our individual situations. Perhaps then the burdens of those around us whether it be financial, spiritual, etc. would be lifted and hence we could avoid tragic consequences as a society. Unfortunately, politics is ignorant to these basic fundementals. This is an imperfect world, but we can always hope, pray, and strive for a better one.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
  211. dave

    Gun control should be discussed. The NRA is strangling the candidates as they are scared of losing votes. You, Jack, gave wrong information when you said gun control means taking guns out of households. Your misinformation adds to gun owner's paranoid feelings about it. Gun control could have many faces, such as requiring a license to own a gun and requiring a police back-ground check for a license. The writers of the constitution wanted to allow us to own shotguns, rifles, and handguns. They didn't mean that we need military assault weapons firing more than one round per second, and holding clips of 100 rounds. Current law allows suspected terrorists to legally own guns. The public needs to be protected, as well as allowing constitutional rights.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
  212. Moe

    None!! Take away the guns, that good, law-abiding citizens own, and we're left with all the criminals holding the firepower. We would longer have the way of protecting families, ourselves, or our property. Other countries would be crazy to try to invade as we'd protect it alongside the soldiers and military.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:27 pm |
  213. Kevin in CA

    Nothing ... it's a Congressional issue. And that means no action in any direction.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:28 pm |
  214. Linda Nelson

    No, it will play no role, until those who want to see those assault rifles banned get up and speak louder than those righteous NRA owners whose voice is always the loudest!

    July 23, 2012 at 5:28 pm |
  215. RZ

    None, it would just be a personal comment the NRA are too involved in politicians. But I woild like to know exactly what it would take to ban assault rifles.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:28 pm |
  216. Joe

    The rising debate on gun control after the events in Colorado are a normal gut reaction to such a terrible event. But strict gun control is not the answer.
    Norway has some of the most strict gun control laws in the world, that didn't save them from the exact same type of event last year. Lets not forget that Explosives are already highly illegal in the U.S. but that didn't stop this guy from rigging his apartment with them.
    When crazy people want to do something crazy, they will always find a way to do it. Had this mad man not been the only person in the theater that night carrying a gun, maybe things wouldn't have gone as far as they did. The police were 90 seconds away and it still wasn't fast enough. People have a right to defend them self and their families against crazy people like this. Taking away guns would only take away peoples ability to defend themselves and would not prevent people like this guy from hurting innocent people if that was his ultimate goal.
    Americans don't want to admit that in this day and age, there still may come a point in life when you have to defend your self, police & government, may not be there to do it for you. And no matter how much you want to think otherwise you cant legislate around that inconvenient fact.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:29 pm |

    It's as futile to ban any guns as it was to ban alcohol during Prohibition. Just TAX the bullets and assault guns heavily and fine those who don't collect the tax. Place an excise tax on the manufacturer, then double the tax for retail sale of firearms with clips holding more than 10 rounds. Make it too expensive to own and use. Let 'em keep the arms they have ONLY if they register them and pass a safety course. Use the revenue to hire more enforcers.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:30 pm |
  218. CS

    You can't legislate crazy or the determination and will of any individual to harm, maim, and/or kill someone. Holmes chose guns as his vehicle, it could have been gasoline and locked doors. You can't legislate this behavior. Drunk Drivers kill far more people given the amount of cars to guns, and comparing numbers cars are far more dangerous and their use more criminal, however we still allow people to drive cars irresponsibly. Impaired judgement is forgivable and accepted by society in general if you drive a car, not so much with a gun. I guess people killed by irresponsible car ownership isn't newsworthy or sensational enough for CNN.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:30 pm |
  219. Matt Toner

    No Role, Jack. Just another diversion from the real issues: Jobs, Debt, Jobs and Debt. If we don't get these under control, there will be a lot of guns in the hands of angry and unstable people. If the lunatics in Washington cared as much about The People as they do about their party, we would not be in this mess. There will always be lunatics out there, gun control will not help that. However, WE THE PEOPLE can vote the lunatics out of Washington. Vote NO for any incumbant – they all had a hand in where we are. Thanks for listening.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:30 pm |
  220. mike C

    if your a convicted felon and want a gun its as simple as going to sites that allow people to post classified ads. then they meet in person he buys the gun , and goes on a rampage . this is not controlled and the real reason why crooks get guns, the government needs stronger laws to prohibit such sites to allow this kind of transaction by holding site owners responsible for aiding in crimes.

    i am not a felon , but i am a legal License to carry american and i went through the proper channels to obtain my pistol .
    i will use it if deemed there is a threat to my well being or my familys. and i dont want my laws changed and increased because some one doesnt know whats right and wrong.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:30 pm |
  221. Eagle44

    When alcohol was banned, criminals made moonshine, drugs are banned and addiction is out of control, insider trading is banned and members of congress are getting rich doing it. Will banning guns solve the murder problem? Maybe, if you ban steak knives, gasoline, fertilizer, rope, baseball bats, tall buildings etc...we're barking up the wrong tree folks....

    July 23, 2012 at 5:31 pm |
  222. Steve in Houston

    Jack – we aren't going to get rid of guns, we shouldn't get rid of guns, they are durable, long-lasting items that are often re-sold, traded or passed down from father to son. Not to mention I believe it is our right to bear arms. But what about ammunition? A gun is not inheritantly lethal without ammunition and ammunition is perishable, at least more so than the gun itself. Why can't we register, track and TAX the HELL out of ammunition – just like the use of taggants in exposives? There will be a small group that like to make their own ammo that will protest, but wouldn't this possibly be an easier, more palatable solution for all sides of the discussion?

    July 23, 2012 at 5:31 pm |
  223. Michael

    Gun control? what about people control. Enforce more death penalty laws and we just might have some gun and people contol. Gun control?

    July 23, 2012 at 5:31 pm |
  224. Dean from NH

    enforce the laws that are on the books.....people that wish to commit a crime will always find away to get guns or explosives or just drive thier car into a school yard and run kids over.....I carry every day legally....just maybe if someone in that movie theater was carring "legally"....... some lives could have been saved....its called defending yourself.... its a shame we dont live in a more perfect world....BUT I can at least even the odds.....live free or die
    Dean from NH

    July 23, 2012 at 5:31 pm |
  225. Earl Wallace


    Why is it that we don't talk about the crime going down in areas where everyday citizens get and learn how to use guns? The simple truth is that bad guys prefer victims that cannot defend themselves. Bad guys are big gun control fans.

    Earl Rancho Cucamonga, CA.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:33 pm |
  226. Bud

    Absolutely nothing. The issue in my opinion still a states rights issue and should be addressed at that level. People kill, maim and injure people using devices other than guns. It is hard for me to believe this nut case got all the weapons & gear with nobody noticing. Then was able to gain entry to the theater.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:33 pm |
  227. carrollhauptle

    I feel like I have been arguing about this ever since the early 90's when I represented a victim of the CIA shootings. Columbine, Giffords, Virginia Tech. This list goes on.

    I am just grateful that some people even discuss gun control when these incidents occur.

    I believe that automatic weapons have no role in civilized society, except in the hands of soldiers. They used to be illegal. They endanger police on the street.

    This is a serious discussion that has a real role in the presidential campaign. "Can't do anything about this" is just not a realistic response.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:33 pm |
  228. Alex from California

    Very. I do not know what the Colorado theater shooting must be like for the victims, but I can somewhat relate because I have grown up in a world where the problem of violence hasn't gotten enough traction. The first step in world peace is putting an end, and I mean end, to violence. Violence will probably be this generation's biggest issue. Like fighting for independence, ending violence will take collective action and sometimes controversial choices. Polarization does not belong, if any, in this area of human life.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
  229. Brian of South Tx

    The answer to your question is none.

    The real issue in the Co. shooting is the lack of mental health care made available from our insureance companies. I have some of the best health insurance money can buy and it only covers $50,000.00 over your lifetime. While I have never needed to test this 50k will not last long in any health care system.


    July 23, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
  230. Alex

    None, as the article said, all the weapons were purchased legally. Gun control of any type, short of taking all weapons away from all people, would not have prevented this tragedy. The shooter passed all required background checks, and no flags were found or they would not have sold him the weapons. Punishing all other legal, law abiding gun owners for the actions of one person is not going to help the situation.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
  231. nosnho

    Get rid of the NRA! It is insane for them be able to lobby in Washington. Just get the guns off the streets and ask Romney and Obama to come to an anti gun resolution before the election....

    July 23, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
  232. Max Sperandeo

    I went to college to become a trusted professional, I passed the tests at the DMV to get my drivers license, I studied extensively and received mentoring to obtain a pilot license, my Dad taught how to use and respect firearms which I now own responsibly. Why do we not require training, mentoring, and a club membership prior to issuing THIS dangerous weapon? Vehicles, airplanes, box cutters, you name are dangerous in the hands of the determined. A sensible and pragmatic oversight and training program, with regular currency requirements, similar to the FAA license renewal program which includes classification levels of equipment ownership is a damn good start.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
  233. Lance Miller

    Gun control should not come up at all. Inforce the laws we have now and stop trying stomp on the Second Amendment.Guns don't kill people bad people do. A gun in the right hands saves lives if you wear to take all the guns away the only people to have guns would be the bad guys because most gun laws only hurt leagal gun owners. But I would like to say I am very sorry to hear about this shooting my deepist sorrow goes out to the victims and familys may god blees you and your familys.

    Lance Miller

    July 23, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
  234. Ken Lynch

    Zero. Gun control is not the issue any more than truck control is the issue in the death of 14 people in TX. This nation has a debt problem. This nation has an unemployment problem. These are the issues that should be the topic for the people seeking the office of the Presidency.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
  235. Raven Artenian

    I personally am appalled by the sudden interest in keeping the American people safe from guns. I believe that we need to have common sense and NOT allow pawn shops or gun stores to sell MILITARY GRADE weapons. Period. If you need a gun its for hunting. If you are getting a gun for protection, then you need to go get a restraining order like everyone else. I believe that the owner of the pawn shop should have charges for selling the weapons to Holmes.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
  236. jan

    none! gun control had nothing to do with what happened in Auroora;the weapons used were bought lagally. mental illness is the problem!. we need to look into ways of helping those who are mentally unstable, getting them the treatment they need to prevent them from commiting the crimes they do with guns!

    July 23, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
  237. carrollhauptle

    This is a serious issue. I have been arguing about this since the CIA shootings, when I was acquainted with one of the victims. Assault weapons have no role in civilized society, and they endanger the police.

    The list of atrocious incidents like this grows every year. The issue is one the candidates need to take up.

    No way around it. People kill people, and when you give them military weapons like these, they kill lots of people.

    carroll from Alexandria.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
  238. Kevin Davis

    None. Ask yourself this question. In the Colorado theater shooting, out of everyone in the theater who was the only one who had the firearms?

    Answer: The Criminal

    If there had been more armed responsible citizens setting in that theater, then it probably would not have been near as many people losing their lives nor had been injured if those citizens would have returned fire and put that threat down. That's why the 2nd admendment exist. People have the right to defend themselves against evil people that do this stuff. It's also sad that no one exercised that right that night.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
  239. Michael

    This is a horrible tragedy, but I feel that gun control is the knee-jerk reaction and not the cogent one. This was not a failure of gun laws, as Holmes appeared to be a totally law-abiding citizen buying guns for legitimate uses; rather it was a failure of society to openly address and treat mental health disorders before a tragedy occurs. This could have been prevented, had mental healthcare been easily accessible and wasn't so stigmatized, but often people refuse to admit they have a disorder due to shame and fear, and all too often it has tragic consequences that may have been preventable or treatable. Instead, 12 people are dead, killed by a delusional man who never got help.

    Michael K from California

    July 23, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
  240. Jeremiah

    Just saw for the first time what he had bought. Buying all that at once should have raised an alarm. It's one thing to buy an AR and buy all this tactical gear for it but buyin all that and then a vest? Explosives? To me that would have raise some sort of red flag.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:38 pm |
  241. Ed G., Seattle WA

    Gun control SHOULD play a huge role in the campaign, but with everyone terrified of the NRA, it will only play a role as an example of another Romney flip-flop.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:38 pm |
  242. Martin

    Over 3,000 deaths in Iraq over the last 10 years sparks national outrage and debate, but over 100,000 deaths on American streets in the same period barely gets a discussion in Congress.

    America's attention span is too short, they barely have enough time to register the impact of one massacre before the next one comes along.

    100,000 people dead due to gun crime in 10 years, but Americans don't seem to want to have any sort of serious discussion about gun control or regulations.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:38 pm |
  243. Gil Fike, Colorado

    None. Gun control laws are for the law-abiding citizens. Criminals will always have guns. Where is the responsibilty for movie producers to make movies that don't have horrific murder scenes that motivate people who are subsceptible to acting out such henious crimes.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:38 pm |
  244. Michael

    It is overwhelming obvious that guns should play an important part in our political discussion. That being said, given the current status of gun proliferation, law and order nuts, the NRA, drug cartels and other social phenomena;no, nothing will be said. To do so would be political suicide without purchasing a gun. All the Tea Party needs is an excuse to purchase a musket to go with their tricorn hats. The truth is being assassinated and is dying in cold blood.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:39 pm |
  245. Richard

    Republicans say that no more gun control is needed, get more law enforcement to do their jobs. But if they get their way budget wise, guess what will be first to be radically cut in the budget? funds for local law enforcement of course. Cities are having a hard enough time with budgets as it is.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:40 pm |
  246. Jeff

    However, the complete ignorance of our constitution and laws exhibited by many of the commentators is frightening. The “militia” has always been considered to be all able bodied males between 18-45. This has even been codified in federal law. The national guard was not even created until 1903.

    The clear intent of the framers of the constitution was that every male between 18-45 be armed IN THE SAME FASHION as a regular soldier or infantryman. That would mean an M-4 Carbine, other rifle or shotgun, plus an M-9 semi-automatic pistol.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:41 pm |
  247. Yardley in GA

    In my very humble opinion, I believe, it's the manufacting of crazy people and not the guns is the problem. If that same crazy person drove a Ford pick up truck through the same theater and killed and injured the same amount of people NOBODY would be calling up the Ford motor company urging them to stop making Ford pickup trucks. The rewarding of bad manners, immature behavior, and a blatant disregard for decency for your fellow human being is the biggest problem in our American society. A gun is a tool just like any other tool in your toolbox and yes, it can be misused by anyone. The control of guns will not make you feel safe only less safe, ask anyone who lived in a country where only the military, police, and criminals have guns. Hopefully, most people will never be confronted by a "crazy" person with a gun but before you pass judgement on the "tool" used think of the "crazy" person using the tool. The 2nd Amendment is the most important piece of legislation ever conceived for our country leave it out of the election.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:43 pm |
  248. Richard

    Guns don't kill people, bullets loaded in 100 shot magazine clips do. Outlaw the large clips and it render the automatics useless whether it is for (against) people or hunting animals.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:43 pm |
  249. Loren, Chicago

    It will just be another political football without resolution. Yes, we all deplore these senseless murders, but implementation of effective gun control is virtually impossible. Resources would be better spent with mental health screening and care to ensure that those who disturbed don't have access to guns.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:43 pm |
  250. David Colford

    It's all in how things are looked at.

    If this was an Al Qaeda terrorist, then real gun control would be screamed for very very quickly by all Americans.

    Because he is a young guy he will be classed as as crazy, nothing will be done with guns/bullets, and the next large gun story may happen (hopefully never) and the apathy will repeat.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
  251. pkfops

    For one, the NRA does not represent the majority of gun owners and in fact they represent just a small fraction.

    I used to be a member and saw through all of their BS. They rule by fear and intimidation. just stand up and call them out.

    As a life long shooter I have no problem with my local government enacting laws to make my community safer.

    Is gun control a national issue?

    It goes in that irreverent category along with abortion and who loves baby Jesus the most.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
  252. Randy Holder

    Quit putting up those "gun free zone" signs. If I'm going to die in a theater full of tear gas with a lunatic shooting away, even if I don't get off a shot, I'd rather die armed. Maybe another armed citizen could've stopped him.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
  253. MPFROST,San Antonio,Texas

    I do not believe that any change in gun laws would make any difference , or help in any way. Why do you think our forefathers put the 2nd Ammendment.they were fleeing tyrany! The city of Chicago has some of the strictest laws on guns
    in the country, and it's one of the more violent . Texas has liberal gun laws, and less violence. Taking away the guns with stricter laws will only encourage the wrong behavior. Guns not the problem.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:48 pm |
  254. Doug

    When I read the 2nd Amendment, I fail to see how this means that every citizen has the right to have a firearm.

    July 23, 2012 at 5:48 pm |