world

Evidence shows months of plotting ahead of Colorado shooting

40 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2012.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

40 Comments
Login to comment

Why are some people so crazy?

Police said Holmes had purchased the weapons legally at three area gun stores in the last 60 days and bought 6,000 rounds of ammunition online, including a 100-round drum magazine for an assault rifle.

Awesome.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

With so much of our private lives nowadays under close scrutiny, it is a wonder some computer somewhere did not flag up such huge quantities of ammo and other serious kit being delivered to one address... and none of the delivery people thought anything funny?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It would be interesting to know whether there was some event that set this guy on this path.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

", it is a wonder some computer somewhere did not flag up such huge quantities of ammo and other serious kit being delivered to one address"

I'm going out on a limb here and wondering if there isn't plenty of people in the US ordering lots and lots of ammo on a regular basis.

It's legal after all, and there are some pretty nutty survivalists and sects out there.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

the U.S gov can easily flag up computer hackers and down loaders but can not flag up large amount of ammo and weapons being brought? they got there priorities right. R.I.P poor victims.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

it is a wonder some computer somewhere did not flag up such huge quantities of ammo...

They probably saw, "magazines" and figured the guy liked to read.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Holmes, he was armed with an AR-15 assault rifle, a 12-gauge shotgun and a Glock .40-caliber handgun, Oates said. Police found an additional Glock.40-caliber handgun in his car. Wondederful !! The people of america has their rights to overthrown the government if the nation became a totalitarian state,! Their morale standard was beyond any country on earth can match!!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

"This begins to explain how he got his hands on all the magazines and ammunition."

The lack of gun laws explain the rest. Had he not been able to get the guns and ammo more easily than ordering a pizza things might have panned out differently -- but don't tell the vested interests!!!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The US is a joke when it comes to gun laws and how cheap life is. Sadly, the dead can't laugh.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

How much taxpayers' money will be spent on Holmes before he's executed?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Probably a lot.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Smith, you're quiet incorrect on gun laws in US; fact is there are myriad gun laws, which is part of the problem. Aurora has a no-concealed-carry law and the cinema also has a no-guns rule. The effect, however, is that it precludes off-duty police and others from being able to defend themselves. Had even one person at the scene been armed(aside from the nutjob), the shooter could have stopped before so many were victimized. The no-guns rule makes people sitting ducks.

The second shooting at Virginia Tech got little media coverage because the shooter was quickly neutralized by an armed person.

Condolences to the families of the many victims.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The second shooting at Virginia Tech got little media coverage because the shooter was quickly neutralized by an armed person.

Herve - so keeping score on the Virginia Tech incident, the bad guys out kill the good guys by a 32-1 margin and you point to this as proof of success for gun laws. Yikes.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Lax gun laws I meant to say

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Had even one person at the scene been armed(aside from the nutjob), the shooter could have stopped before so many were victimized. The no-guns rule makes people sitting ducks.

Had people in the theater been armed, it most likely would have resulted in even more injuries/deaths as panicking people fired blindly in the dark.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

When a person goes off the deep end they will find the means for destruction one way or another whether it be legal or not.

It sounds like you are saying ease of availability of firearms has no influence at all on the number of these kind of random shootings.

Whether it's as easy as 'ordering a pizza' or it takes months and lots of time/effort/money to get a gun, the outcome is going to be the same. Do you really believe that?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

As for gun ownership, well it should be at least a difficult as getting a drivers license, maybe even more so, you should be made to prove that you are sane, and can operate said piece safely and all the other things that go with that. Yes right now you can walk into your local merchant that sells guns and walk out with pretty much all you can afford to buy and the merchant just enjoys the days nice profits. The only people who need hand guns are officers of the law, the main purpose of a pistol is shoot a person, pretty much has been since they were created. Then an assault riffle for hunting? I agree that is a joke, if I can't hit my target with one or two rounds I don't deserve to be out there. Not to mention that there have been numerous tests of marksmen against machine-gunners, and the marksmen always win (even the "Mythbusters" TV show proved this) so no need for a gun with 100 round magazine, 3 to 5 rounds is all you need.

I too wonder why the computers in the package delivery system didn't red-flag this guys large purchase of ammo. 6,000 rounds for the mentioned weapons had to weigh a lot and even why didn't his work notice the deliveries of heavy packages.

Too many questions, but yes he would have found a way just like so many before him.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Herve Nmn L'Eisa

Had even one person at the scene been armed(aside from the nutjob), the shooter could have stopped before so many were victimized

Why stopped at one, why not the entire movie goers?

Can you imagine what would happen?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Frank Vaughn

I concede that with guns the death toll probably would have been higher

That's the idea!

We can't stop crimes, there'll always be a nutjob somewhere trying to prove their points.

But we can reduce the mortality rate by banning guns when that happened.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

To clear some air; many states require a pre-purchase certification for handguns that includes taking and passing a written test very much like a driver's test; in some states it's harder than a driver's license test. You then get a license to purchase card that's good for a given time, usually up to 5 years.

Most states have a waiting period for at least handguns after purchase, before you can actually pick up the firearm, so you cannot walk in, buy a handgun, and walk out the door. The period varies; many states include rifles in the waiting period and some states make you wait as long as 14 days.

All states require running the FBI background check at the time of purchase to flag felons, registered ineligibles, and some police record tags, like restraining order. Many states require registration of handgun purchases and retention of those records; some states require registration and retention of record for rifles.

Note that the Brady law, between 1999 and 2009 blocked nearly 2 million sales to ineligibles, with over 100 million checks run.

Five states "ban" AR and AK variant rifles, and others that resemble assault-rifles. You cannot actually legally buy an assault rifle, they are banned in all states - assault rifles have selective, automatic fire; that is part of the definition. Just because something looks like an assault rifle does not mean it is.

Many "normal" looking hunting rifles have the same operating principals as what are commonly called assault rifles. Many military style rifles that do not resemble ARs or AKs are not considered assault rifles types, and there's no ban; e.g., M1A1 (M14) rifles are not restricted, and they are more powerful than ARs.

Hunting with AR style rifles is allowed in many states, given the caliber is sufficient to dispatch medium or large game, and such firearms are as well suited to hunting as anything else, because they can be very accurate, and are semi-automatic; one shot per trigger pull. True, you don't need 100 rounds to take down a deer...

Large purchases of ammunition are common among those who frequently engage in firearm sports: hunters, amateur and pro competitors, target shooters, because like every other commodity, purchase in bulk is cheaper and handier than small lots.

One thousand rounds is a very common bulk package; the number of people who buy these kinds of amounts is huge. UPS, FedEx, even the USPS deliver ammo in bulk with reasonable restrictions. It is common for someone who practices regularly to go through 200 rounds in a single range session.

I won't go into debate or argument about need, use, validity of personal gun ownership - there is literally hundreds of years of debate about this. I will say that I know quite a number of police, sheriffs, federal officers, and police and military trainers (SWAT and SpecOps), and all of them advocate responsible civilian gun ownership.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

President is supposed to be here tonight. I believe he will make an important announcement tonight for Americans that he will ban all assult weapons use here in US.

If he wants to lead this country, he needs to do this NOW. Many republican/demo. governors including Gov. Bloomberg (NYC) are already enouraging President Obama to do so. We Americans feel this is the most important issue TODAY for this election.

Americans are ready for change, we will stand up high against assult weapons and violence. President Obama is not afraid to do so, and we will join him by responding (vote) in November!! I sm very confident he will deliver this speech tonight from Denver, CO.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

<<>>

Here is just one link for one article. The author Mr. Fox has studied this and says the same thing essentially, and he works for CNN so saying he is part of the pro-gun group will not be an argument against him.

http://www.channel3000.com/news/Fox-Gun-control-won-t-stop-mass-murder/-/1648/15619060/-/13pcprbz/-/index.html

Mass killers are determined, deliberate and dead-set on murder. They plan methodically to execute their victims, finding

the means no matter what laws or other impediments the state attempts to place in their way. To them, the will to kill

cannot be denied.

If you want more just ask "google" and you'll get all you can read in a lifetime.

I will give you this though, if even 25% of what he wrote is true I am completely horrified at what goes on in the U.S. (all right even 1% is too much).

I however remain a staunch advocate for responsible ownership of responsible guns (see previous post).

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Among the dead were a 6-year-old girl who had just learned to swim

Her name is Veronica Moser-Sullivan. Her mother Ashley Moser has a bullet lodged in her throat and a gunshot wound to her abdomen. When she is conscious she asks about her daughter Veronica. No one is telling her the truth yet. No one is up to it.

There is a little about each person who was slain by Holmes on this link

http://news.yahoo.com/colo-authorities-identify-final-rampage-victims-224522288.html

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Problem is making them illegal does not remove them from society. He had lots of illegal things in his apartment and was just sick. Am sure if he could hot gotten firearms, he would of used something else.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Xeno23, thank you for your well-informed, factual post. The more correctly informed people are about this(or any) topic the better. But the anti-gun lobby is all about emotional hype, clamoring loudly for more safety yet are clueless about self-defense.

Yes, had there been some armed citizens in the theater, the carnage would have been reduced and lives SAVED.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I really only have one thing to say about this whole sad tragic story and that is why in any civilised nation is the general public allowed access to semi automatic assault rifles. For what purpose could anyone justify buying or owning one?

Seriously why do people need a semi auto rifle of the type this guy had access to. You do not need it for hunting, you do not need it for fun, and you sure as h*** dont need it for personal protection. The sooner the US wake up and takle these gun nuts the better, these types of weapons do not belong in the hands of the general public for any reason what so ever.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Cletus, your confusion about semi-automatic weapons vs. fully-automatic weapons and assault weapons is understandable. Do a little googling to read up on the differences. Reread Xeno23's post as well.

@FrankV, I agree with you about responsible gun ownership. I do support handgun ownership for personal protection. As an avid wilderness trekker, mine have saved my skin several times. Since I generally feel unsafe in big cities due to the concentration of the criminal element(gangsters, crooks, and miscellaneous deviants), I avoid them as much as possible and feel very vulnerable having to rely on cops, especially in US. So, if I lived there again, I would be sure to have my own protection at all times.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Herve Nmn L'Eisa

Cletus, your confusion about semi-automatic weapons vs. fully-automatic weapons and assault weapons is understandable. Do a little googling to read up on the differences. Reread Xeno23's post as well.

LOL thats hilarious, l have no misunderstanding whatsoever about the differences between a semi and full auto or an assault weapon. Seems you do though! Or is it that as a pro gun fan you are trying to through doubt in peoples mind. Yeah its very obvious that you are pro gun by the last line of your 0730 post where you claimed more armed people would have saved lives. That is a joke, more untrained people running around with guns is a recipe for disaster rather than having one gunman shooting people you would have had people shooting in every direction in the confusion.

Now just so YOU know an assault rifle is:

It must be an individual weapon with provision to fire from the shoulder (i.e. a buttstock); It must be capable of selective fire; It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle; Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable magazine rather than a feed-belt. And it should at least have a firing range of 300 meters (1000 feet)

Now as the AR-15 is a semi auto and doesnt have the ability to be used on full auto it technically doesnt fall into that catagory. But it meets every other criteria. However it is very easy and legal to obtain the required part (google it) to convert a AR-15 from semi to full auto. As it is many other "semi auto's".

And l will ask the question again why on earth does someone need a AR-15 or AK or any other military style rifle. I would love to hear what excuses there could be for possibly allowing these style rifles to be legal.

And yes while the AR-15 may be legal because by definition it is not an "assault rifle" it is still capable of firing at a massive rate of fire and with large capacity magazines attached the rifle is devastating. So answer me this, what on earth would this rifle or similar need to be legal?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Cletus, even it illegal this guy could of bought an AK-47, fully auto and ready to go. The AR-15 can be modified to fire auto, it is just not the same weapon. While they look alike the M16 is built to a higher standard. It is like putting a turbo onto a regular engine. Something will fail, like holes in pistons of bearing failures.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

YuriOtani

Cletus, even it illegal this guy could of bought an AK-47, fully auto and ready to go. The AR-15 can be modified to fire auto, it is just not the same weapon. While they look alike the M16 is built to a higher standard. It is like putting a turbo onto a regular engine. Something will fail, like holes in pistons of bearing failures.

Yuri the semi auto and the auto AR-15/M-16 are in essence the same weapon the differences between the two are the bolt and trigger, the bolt carrier and the lower receiver. Everything else is the same. so your comparison is slightly wrong. And as l said earlier it is just a matter of replacing the parts and maybe some machining.

But regardless of whether the rifle is a semi auto or converted to full auto. Seriously what is this sort of rifle doing in the hands of the public. As you have said many times you where in the military and you should know that a semi auto with a large magazine is capable of a large sustained rate of accurate fire (more accurate then full auto). Why on earth is this style of weapon available to the general public. Ban all semi auto's simple as that.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Cletus, my comment was not a personal attack, nor should it have read that way. I'm well aware of the definition, but thank you for posting it. You might be surprised to learn that I, too, see no need for anyone to have AR's, though I have used one.

As you're probably also aware, having the know-how and ability(parts, etc.) to convert a semi to full-auto is also illegal(at least where I lived). Nor do I deem hundred-round clips/mags at all reasonable.

I DO fully support ownership, but in a responsible, well-trained manner. I do NOT think anyone without proper training should have access. What I would support would be training and certification by an NGO, or the NRA for all gun owners. It could be similar to scuba certification, like by PADI or NAUI.

My friends in law enforcement would agree.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Thanks to the handful who provided snippets of support for my various statements and a good reason for owning a side-arm. Gun ownership in America is an issue with two sides that will never compromise and there it will stay.

But I believe this article was about the fact that this guy was going to do this no matter what and that he would have acquired the means to do so whether legally purchased or not. There are abundant studies and opinions on the Internet (when I asked google I got more than I could read in the next year) about this phenomenon and how these people will not let anything short of their own death stop their madness. Unless we remove ALL guns everywhere in the world a madman will find one (or more) to use in his plot. Why does it seem that everyone in America is intent of blowing each other away, I don't know and I don't think the shrinks out there can tell us accurately either.

For now I going to go back and re-read the article about what to do when some one goes crazy on the street that played here a few weeks ago.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Herve Nmn L'Eisa

I DO fully support ownership, but in a responsible, well-trained manner. I do NOT think anyone without proper training should have access. What I would support would be training and certification by an NGO, or the NRA for all gun owners. It could be similar to scuba certification, like by PADI or NAUI. My friends in law enforcement would agree.

See this is were you and l disagree, regardless of training l do not think it should be peoples "right" to have a gun. Unless they have a specific need for a weapon then they should not have access to one. And no self defense is not a specific need. And those that can demonstrate a need, farmers, etc should be required to have a license and undergo training at a regular interval. This sort of thing works in other nations and surely it to can work in the US if the gun nuts are will ing to give up their weapons which l cant see happening. Maybe the best that can be hoped for is the removal of certain types of weapons.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Well said Cletus. I expected it wouldn't be hard to convert the AR15 to fully automatic, I bet anyone can buy the part to do so easily enough over the internet, like activating "replica's" I've seen in the past.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

My question here is where was Homeland Security? This guy buys thousands of rounds of ammunition over the internet and that didn't register with the NSA, CIA, FBI, or ATF?

These clowns can NOW legally follow what you do on the internet and a purchase of thousands of rounds of ammo didn't click with anyone.

This is a tragedy but It's also a law enforcement failure. Had someone monitored his online activity (something I'm totally against but with knowledge that there is no way that genie is ever going back in the bottle), this could have been avoided.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"These clowns can NOW legally follow what you do on the internet and a purchase of thousands of rounds of ammo didn't click with anyone."

I've already suggested similar purchases may be a current occurrence in the US judging by all the militias, nuts and crazy sects they have over there. It's quite possible "normal", rather than a law enforcement failure.

Unless you're a Pablo Escobar wannabe, you don't need automatic weapons and thousands of rounds to protect your self.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Cletus,

Indeed, where we disagree is on the fundamental right to bear arms, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment. And that's central to both how and why the united States of America is different. The Founders set it that way for very good reasons including lessons learned from the onset of the War for Independence from the tyranny of British rule.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Gee I'm sure the founding fathers had gas-powered assault rifles in mind when they penned the second ammendment Hervé.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Madverts, don't twist my words.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Madverts, don't twist my words.

herve - Madverts didn't twist your words. He exposed them. You just defended the sale of automatic weapons because the King of England might one day ask for the United States back.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites