The senseless killings in Colorado has heated up the gun control debate once again and NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg is stirring up the anti-gun pot by pounding on the doors of Obama and Romney.

No one in their right mind can disagree that what happened was a true tragedy in the purest extent.  Holmes who can now be branded as a nut job slaughtered 12 innocent people and wounded 59 who were all out to enjoy a movie.

The gun control proponents will scream that we need tighter gun control.  They will also scream that if we had tighter gun control this would have never happened. I personally disagree with them.

New York City has the toughest handgun law in the nation making it almost impossible for a law abiding citizen to own a hand gun.  New York State has the second toughest hand gun law.  Every year in NYC we hear about some person or group of people that are either robbed, assaulted and or shot by a criminal with a hand gun.  Very recently as of 7/23/12, the news tells of of someone being shot in a robbery in NYC.  This is a perfect example in how gun control fails.  Like the saying goes, if we out law guns only outlaws will have guns.

And Bloomberg has to run off at the mouth when he can't get illegal guns of the streets of NYC. Sorry Mike but the gun laws in NYC simply do not work.

Let's not forget that Holmes bought the firearms legally.  So as far as that is concerned no laws were broken.  And from what I gather anyone over 18 can legally own a firearm in Colorado including hand guns.

With that thought you would think that some of the patrons would have been armed.  But apparently that was not the case.  Why should they?  This is not the old west.  Gun opponents like to point out that without gun control things would be like the old west and everyone would be shooting up the place.  Here we see that is not the case.

I am sure that if there were a few patrons in the theater that were armed and knew (keyword: KNEW) how to use a firearm properly, the death toll and those injured most likely would have been a lot less.  Of course Holmes would have been been shot and possibly killed all in the line of self defense.  I know that I would have returned fire once I had a clean shot.

There are two towns in the US where in order to live there you must own a firearm.  Of course they do have certain exceptions like an ex-felon, someone with mental issues, or who conscientiously objects to firearms and or who cannot afford them.  One town. Kennesaw GA was selected in 2007 as one of the ten best towns to live in and they have less than one half the US Average crime.  In the years 2003 - 2008 crime dropped significantly.  (source: Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia).

It stands to reason why. Would you want to break into someone's home knowing that they are armed?  I didn't think so.  You want to rob someone knowing that they might be armed, think again.  You want to assault someone knowing that they might have a 9mm?  Hope your affairs are in order.

What bothers me is that a big red flag went up and no one saw it.  That nut job bought 6,300 rounds of ammo.  The media never said what calibers.  Were they .223, .40 or for the shotgun?  And how many for each?  Why would a person want or need that much ammo in the first place?

OK if the person competes in shooting I can see buying large amounts of ammo used for practicing.  In that case it would be very easy to burn through 6,000 rounds in a week.  And if the person owned a gun range and supplied or resold the ammo they would buy it by the packs, unless the bulk sales had them prepacked say in 50 round boxes.

I know a few people that hunt and they don't use that many rounds in a season.  One guy I knew bought a 20 round box several years ago and has yet to fire a single shot when he went hunting.

So buying large amounts of ammo should raise a read flag, especially 6,000 rounds.  Unless he bought a thousand one week, another thousand two weeks later and so on.   I don't know.  The media did say he got a package of ammo that weighed over 100 pounds.  I would think that should raise a few questions.  Don't you?

Now here is a suggestion that has a lot of merit.  Forget about gun control all together.  It does not work.  Like I said earlier NYC is the perfect example.  Instead make it a federal law that if you want to own a firearm you must attend a mandated firearms safety and marksmanship course and pass it.  Much like a drivers license.  And it must be renewed say every two years by retaking the course.  Here is where the keyword from above comes in.  You  must know how to properly handle a firearm to own one.

This could be a good source of revenue for the states and those training people.

And let me point out even though people get drivers licenses some can and do a lot of damage with a car.  A case in point when a SUV was traveling at 80MPH in NYC hit a concrete pole, flipping and killing 5 and injuring 2 on 7/22/12 (source: Newsday.  http://www.newsday.com/long-island/five-people-killed-in-fiery-queens-crash-1.3852945).

So licensing is not a cure all but at least people would know how to use a firearm properly and safely and could potentially become a deterrent for another nut job.

Just for the heck of it I looked at some statistics on motor vehicle deaths vs deaths by guns.  Now I don't want to get into a pissing match or a flame war over the figures nor do I want to split hairs on any of them.  What I found out is the raw total data.

In the year 2009 there were 33,808  killed in motor vehicle accidents.  (source: US Census Bureau Table 1105 Fatal Motor Vehicle Accidents National Summary: 1990 to 2009)  Unfortunately I did not see any newer data.  It might be there, but I was unable to locate it.

In the same year there were 9,146 were killed by firearms (source: The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state#data).  It is interesting to note that in 2010 there were 8,775 people killed with firearms.

Here we see that 24,662 more people were killed in motor vehicle accidents as compared to those killed by guns.  And I don't see anyone yelling that we need to eliminate cars.

At the end of the day, 1 person killed is 1 person to much regardless if it was by a gun or car.  I don't want to overshadow that fact.  But things really need to be taken into perspective.  It is easier in many states to own a gun than a car.  With a car you need to have a license to drive and for the most part you don't to own a gun.  But let us not forget that 33,808 people were killed in 2009 in motor vehicle accidents.

And what is really ticking me off is the fact they everyone is forgetting the fact that the nut job wired his apartment with explosives.  I don't see anyone screaming about that either.

Looking at the TV news the police were able to blow the bombs up safely at a range where no one would get hurt.  By looking at the size of the blasts from the bombs, if they went off in the apartment the entire building would have been leveled.

How did he get the bombs in the first place?  The media reported that he studied chemistry in college and was good at it.  Who better can build a bomb than a chemist?  But I don't see chem classes canceled or chemists registering like you would a firearm.   Nor do I see anyone screaming that we should ban chemists all together.

And let us not ever forget the Oklahoma bombing.  Here a nut job who was not a chemist used diesel fuel and fertilizer as the materials for his bomb.  He was no chemist, just a complete wacko.  And look at the damage he did.

If that is not scarey enough you can find the instructions in the library or the internet in how to make one.  I remember I was doing a school report in Junior High School in the '60s on WWII and came across a book in the school library that showed how warheads were made.  I never built one nor have I heard of anyone like that nut job doing so either.  And some people want gun control?

And never ever forget the tragedy on 9/11.   Here more nut jobs used box cutters to turn airliners into guided missiles.  They didn't use guns or bombs, just routine everyday box cutters.  I don't see a ban on the sales of those, do you?

Now to toss in a woulda-shoulda-coulda thought.  The media reported that the nut job went into the theater and out a fire exit and blocked it open to let himself back in.  Maybe a new law should be put into place that emergency exits must be wired to an alerting system.  This way if someone opens the exit door say in a theater again an alert would go off in the managers office and in the ticket booth.  This way someone can close the door.  I know it is rough but it is an idea that needs to be refined and expanded on.

It is certain that the nut job is never going to see the light of day again.  The state has I think it is 2 months to decide if they want to go for the death penalty.

As a father and husband and if it were my family that were victims, you are damn right I would demand that Holmes get the needle in the arm.  Only instead of getting knocked out, having the breathing stopped and then the heart stopped, I would rather see them give him the paralytic and have him suffocate while still aware of what s going on.  But like I said that is the father and husband speaking and I am sure many of the survivors would agree with me.

But if you look at it, the death penalty has not stopped any crimes in all of history.  The state of Texas has executed more people in the US than any other state since the death penalty was re-established and their death row is full.  Plus the cost of putting a person to death is higher than keeping them in prison for the rest of their lives.  This is due to all of the appeals and what have you.

I feel that this nut should get life in prison at hard labor instead.  This way he can think about what he did to those innocent lives for as long as he breathes.  Maybe even have him review the lives that he took so he could get a better understanding of those he hurt.

Besides even if he does get death, he might never see the execution chamber.  Colorado executed only 1 person since they re-enacted the death penalty and that execution was in 1997.  Currently there are 4 already on Death Row.  (source: Death Penalty Information Center, http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/state_by_state) so the chance of Holmes getting put to death is slim.

Now why did he do this?  At this writing I don't think anyone will know for sure.  I have my own theories and some have merit, at least to me.

First look at the movies and TV.  How many films and shows do we see that have a lot of graphic violence in them?  A lot.  Can it be that people are desensitized by seeing and wanting more gore?  It seems that the more gore that a movie has, the better the sales and ratings.  When I was growing up when a person was shot they fell down.  And it was one or two people not the bulk amounts that we see today.  Today when a person gets shot we see blood splatter or spray, body parts, limbs getting cut off and more.    A lot different than the past.

As an example we watched an episode of Criminal Minds on TV.  They showed and were very specific in it in what to do with a plastic bag and duct tape.  It left nothing to the imagination.  Hollywood should really re-think how it makes movies and TV shows.

Video games are getting as bad or if not worse than what is on the screen.  The big sellers are filled with violent acts with loads of gore.  Again another way we are desensitized.

I also feel that the school systems are partly to blame.  Years ago if you did something wrong you were punished and when you got home, mom and dad had their turn.  I am not talking beatings here folks.  A good whack on the rear never hurt anyone same with being sent to bed without TV and what have you.

Today the schools say they would rather you talk it over with the child to see why they were bad and to discuss the matter.  Plus when they go home mom and dad are not to do anything except to say I am disappointed in you and let it go at that.  The schools feel that if you discipline the child they could become a mass murderer.  Err excuse me?

When my kids were in school that is exactly what they told us.  Not to discipline our kids but rather talk things over with them and reason with them.  Then let them have the TV or computer all they want.  The schools gave all kinds of lectures on that and even implied the threat that it would be child abuse otherwise.

I gave it back to them telling them that the butt is made for three things, sitting, sh...ing, and hitting.  If you are kinky in later life there is a forth thing.  I said if need be I had no problem in giving the kids a swat on the rear if they needed it.   Otherwise it is off to bed without the TV.  Come out for supper and then back into bed.  I even challenged them to go ahead and take me to court, I could use the money from the law suit.  They backed down from me real fast.

All in all only one child was swatted on the diaper once.  They all got tossed into their rooms without the TV and computer for punishment at times.  So far they have all grown up fine and are doing better than their peers.  So much for the schools theory on child rearing.

Besides years ago before I was around my parents got a good swat or two when they were bad and no one in their generation ever turned out to be a mass murderer like the recent nut job.

Finally another theory on what could have happened.  Life is moving faster today and more pressure is being exerted on people than ever before.  Pressure to get ahead and get rich.  For those of us that are older we can handle it better but those that are younger simply cannot cope as well.  They seem to crack.

The idiot that took my job away from me is an example.  He wanted my job so bad he went out of his way to screw me over instead of sitting back and waiting for me to retire.  He too was pressured to go to the top as fast as possible without learning the ropes and paying his dues.  Eventually he will fail.  A few birdies have whispered in my ear that he cannot handle the pressure that I was under.

As an example that 26 year old punk went into a full blown panaic attack when a server had a small problem.  He said that the server did a fatal crash (mind you he never worked in a network environment before) and my nasty boss belived him over me all because he paniced.  The kids of today just cannot hanlde stress.

There is just too much pressure to succeed that back stabbing is at an all time high and those that cannot handle it take to drugs or have some sort of break down.  Maybe that nut job had an episode like that.  Maybe all of those theories played a part.  Who knows?

Is it possible that all of my theories or at least some of them could have lead to Holmes going off the deep end and killing innocent lives?  I honestly don't know.  That is not an area of my expertise.

All I can say is that gun control is not the answer.  Education, eduction and education with a good dose of rethinking life is.

'till next time