lib asked this question on The Couch forum:
In light of the recently Colorado shooting, I was curious to know if anyone feels that tighter gun control would prevent this kind of tragedy in the future. Thoughts?
I have read elsewhere that legislation controlling 'guns kept personally' was in circulation for a while, but then there are people 'for' and 'against' it.
Humanity, as long as you see through various cultures, traditions and mythology, has tried to keep weapons with them. Sometimes they used weapons made from objects around them and at others they designed them specifically.
At once and still in some regions weapons are required to control wildlife which seems sane to me(,but I did not say that I like shooting animals.)
I think it's 'rage'(Kali) in Kaliyuga, which is caused by the anger and himsa(violence) which is the true problem and not the guns.
However, it's also true that bigger the weapon in the hands of the mad monkey more the damage. It depends on context as well: Do you think that nuclear holocaust helped in stopping world war or consider it an aghast mass-murder by a vengeful nation?
In my opinion, if people had a little bit more tolerance and compassion there wouldn't have been any need of weapons in places which are not wild; but then, if animals roam around freely in the form of man, under the possession of darkness, even cities are like wildlife, so then who knows what.
The answer is--it's a temporary solution. If people started cultivating more harmonious thoughts towards each and started speaking Truth, the world would have become a prosperous and peaceful place.
As asides: James Holmes looks like a name which is a patch of James Moriarty and Sherlock Holmes; dramatically, James precedes Holmes.
A. Do you think that someone could do this as a publicity stunt?
B. Do you think that this 'time of turbulence-recession and political campaigns,' was chosen after a lot of thinking for this movie's release?
People have gone as far as saying that it's Romney playing games.
What do you think?