Home Videos Photos

Dark Knight Massacre & Gun Control: The View Weighs In

| Filed under: TV NewsPolitikSad SadPerezTV

There is a heated discussion circulating among Americans - and the global community - concerning gun control and the place automatic weapons have in a modern society, striving (hopefully) for peaceful co-existence.

The now infamous Dark Knight Rises mass-murderer James Holmes so easily obtained his instruments of death - an AR-15 assault rifle, a Remmington 12-guage shotgun and 2 40-caliber glock handguns - LEGALLY from gun stores and purchased mass amounts of ammunition on-line.

In response to the horrific crime that took place Friday in Aurora, the lovely ladies over at The View touched upon the volatile issue of gun control - or lack thereof - in the United States.

Watch this important debate in action (above)!

While "the right to bear arms" is guaranteed by the constitution, you have to consider the time and circumstances under which the constitution was originally written!

Did they have advanced weaponry in the 1700s? No.

Was the world - including America - a tumultuous mess of warring parties, whose first instinct in solving a problem was threataning violence? Yes.

Haven't we moved beyond the point of needing such violent tools created SOLELY to hurt/kill other individuals? Not yet, but isn't that what we should aim for? As humans? Who all have to live together on this planet?

If we do not strive for peace, we will end up destroying ourselves, and using guns to keep the peace is a MASSIVE contradiction…

Just saying.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

17 Of South Park's Most Offensive Celebrity "Cameos" On The Show's 17th Anniversary!
Remembering Robin Williams: July 21, 1951 - August 11, 2014
20 Celebs Who Were Homeless
That '70s Show! Where Are They Now?
Celebs Who Died Under Bizarre Circumstances!
10 Reality TV Couples Broken Up By The Spotlight!
Email this  »

42 comments to “Dark Knight Massacre & Gun Control: The View Weighs In”



  1. 1

    Well, thank you for your interpretation of the constitution. BTW, isn't this the site that used to draw dongs and semen on everybody? Stick to entertainment morons.



  2. 2

    Well that discussion was all over the map. But I do wonder about assault rifles. Who buys those and why? Is there a reasonable need for an assault rifle, or are they just fun to play with? Bottom line with this guy - if he couldn't get guns, he would have used fire, bombs, gas, or some other method of killings. I don't see guns as being the real issue here.

  3. krissy312 says – reply to this


    3

    your an iddiot Perez..stick to Gossip



  4. 4

    People don't stop killers.
    People with guns do.



  5. 5

    Striving for peace sounds nice, but the reality is that it is NEVER going to happen. Peace has never happened and it never will. I'm probably never going to be a gun toting individual, but by I can acknowledge when a gun might come in handy. Cops have used guns to protect citizens, people in households have saved their family from danger. So yes, guns are to hurt people but it's not always in such a evil way the way you make it seem to be. It'd be nice to never have to use a gun, but get your head out of this fantasy world and realize there are situations that it would come in handy. Because no matter how strict gun laws get, some loon is always going to be able to get one.



  6. 6

    I wish Sheri Shepard would just shup the f*** up. The dumb lady should just cash her million dollar checks and shut up, I cant stand her stupidity.



  7. 7

    I think everyone should strive for peace, but there are people with bad intentions who will get their hands on guns whether or not there is a gun ban and you can bet that criminals will love it once they find out that normal people aren't allowed to own guns. If this guy was so intent on killing others, he would've found a way to get those weapons illegally if he wasn't otherwise allowed to. Besides, it's not a gun problem, it's a social problem. If people in our society weren't so self-absorbed with their own lives (including his family), then maybe he would've received the right psychological attention/treatment before this happened.



  8. 8

    BTW, we know of one person who misused multiple guns on July 20th for the most cruel and unnecessary reasons, but what about the millions of other people living in the U.S who have registered firearms and didn't use them to commit mass murder that day???



  9. 9

    would you quit lying. he did not purchase or own an assualt weapon and did not own an automatic weapon. You are a lying sack of shit as is doopee. Auto weapons owners are subject to an FBI check and a $200 license fee per weapon. arguments should bew based upon facts not your fucking lies. you wouldn't know the reasoning behind the constitution if it bit you on the ass. a wise man once said,,, the only defence against tyrany of the state is an armed citizenry. you and doopee can go take a flying fuck at a rolling donot.



  10. 10

    I am not giving up my guns when I know that criminals wont.



  11. 11

    Re: rosebud99 – rosey, an assualt weapon is one that fires both semi and full auto. you cannot stop in any gun shop and but a full auto capable weapon. first you have to have a class three dealer, then you have to pass an extensive federal background check( not the 7 days nonsense) to get a class three license at $200 per weapon and then send $2000. or more for the weapon it self. All of these liars in the media throw out the assualt weapon card when talking about a semi auto ( one pull of the trigger for one bullet) firearm., the truth will set you free.



  12. 12

    [re=6129566]Re: sick_girl[/re,,,] ,,,, bravo



  13. 13

    Re: LaurenAshley – ,,,exactly



  14. 14

    Thanks for not putting my comment up MARIO. You know what I said was legit.

  15. Glen says – reply to this


    15

    While I am not for it, the argument on "why assault rifles" etc is that the right to bear arms is to allow a citizen to protect themselves, even from the government. If you limit the average citizen to hunting rifles and such, they are clearly out gunned by the army, police, what have you. It was written when only the British had arms, the people took up arms and overthrew the government.

  16. ONIT says – reply to this


    16

    They have a second interesting topic that has nothing to do with the shooting. The shooter is still to blame and nobody else. Concerning the shooting it's off topic but the women talked about it. The question is why parents bring their young children to a midnight showing of a PG13 movie? I do understand that the law allows it in this country, the US, but I do know that especially in Europe it's against the law to do so. If you do so the theater owner, who basically allowed it, has to pay a very high fine (around $12.000) and child service could get involved.

  17. nationalenquirer says – reply to this


    17

    Perez, stick to Gossip, this subject is WAY over your frankenhead.



  18. 18

    Re: raypearson – Thanks for the info. Like a lot of people, I'm sure, I didn't know the difference.

  19. nationalenquirer says – reply to this


    19

    Seriously….this is WAY out of your discussion league, let me help you……"boybands" ! …Discuss !

  20. Just sayin' says – reply to this


    20

    You people commenting are quite pro gun huh? I'm not really judging, it's just that I'm from a country with very strict gun laws and basically only law enforement and criminals have guns and the criminals tend to use them only amongst themselves. It's exceptionally rare that a civilian is shot. I just couldn't imagine living the way that some of you prescribe. I get where you're coming from and in the most non-patronizing way possible, I guess you don't know any better. There's no alternative in the United States. Guns appear to be sacrosanct. Perhaps moreso than human life. Bummer.

  21. nationalenquirer says – reply to this


    21

    Re: Jchron79 – No, he doesnt do that anymore the much kindler, gentler Perezzzzz Lite now draws hearts over straight mens crotches and giggles.

  22. MLeezer says – reply to this


    22

    First of all the government is already trying to take away enough of our rights. I have read some interesting comments in varies articles pertaining to the conceal carry law. Illinois does NOT have the conceal carry law, and Chicago has one of (if the THE) highest murder rate due to gun shots. Could that be because the people carrying firearms ILLEGALLY know they can get away with it because most victims wont have a weapon to defend themselves. I would say at least 85% of the population that owns a firearm have no intentions of hurting/killing anyone. Our family owns many guns - for hunting purposes….to put food on our table - and they want to strip us of that right?? Even though the theater did not allow weapons inside, I can guarantee if ONE person would have had a weapon in their possession they could have saved at least a dozen lives. And lets be honest people….if the man would not have been able to purchase guns he would have probably caused an explosion causing more fatalities……I mean look at what they found in his apartment. Once again its a case of lets punish everyone because stupid people ruin it for the rest of us. If you think for one second taking away the right to bare arms is going to make this a less violent world you all are delusional.

  23. MLeezer says – reply to this


    23

    Re: ONIT – and PG13 means and child under the age of 13 must have Parental Guidance.

  24. Chelsey says – reply to this


    24

    Re: sbqueen123 – I agree with you 100%! Whether guns are illegal or not, criminals will still find ways to get ahold of them. And they will love it when they realize normal people arent able to carry guns around. If you think about it, criminals are more likely to commit a criminal act in an area where people are more unlikely to be unarmed than armed.



  25. 25

    Re: rosebud99 – you're welcome



  26. 26

    The 2nd Amendment was placed to let the people of our nation to protect themselves from the government (which is starting to get out of control as we speak). Over time this has included our ability to protect our loved ones. I hate having to write this over & over & over again, but criminals don't care what the gun laws are & will get their firearms no matter what is & is not allowed. I guarantee the dumbass that breaks into my house will sh*t bricks when I release the charger of my AK. You allow the government to restrict one type of firearm just leaves the door open for them to put more restrictions & before you know it, we'll be unarmed & our government will be able to do as it pleases. Just look at history of dictators. What did they all do? Took away the people's firearms. The View is nothing but a bunch of clucking chickens (as Seth MacFarlane accurately depicted). Perez, stop shoving your anti 2nd Amendment beliefs down your readers' throats.



  27. 27

    Re: bluephoenix – "I guarantee the dumbass that breaks into my house will sh*t bricks when I release the charger of my AK. " well yeah, but i like the sound of a pump 20 or 12, that sound is sooo damn scary in a dark room.

  28. GreatGooglymoogly says – reply to this


    28

    I understand some people wanting guns to feel safe, although I'm not a big supporter of weapons. I would rather own a highly charged long-projection taser gun instead, it seems a little more difficult to get one of those though. I don't feel comfortable with the sales of automatic and semi-automatic to the public, as even the squeeky-cleanest person can pass a clearance and still acquire a psychotic disorder later on in life. I don't mind high-powered hand guns but the heavy rifles leave me a bit uncomfortable. But I guess to each their own.

  29. Anna says – reply to this


    29

    I'm so glad I live in a country where I don't have to walk down the street worried about if someone around me could possibly pull out a gun at any moment.. no one has guns, so less chance of something crazy going down.. that makes me feel safe.. how does someone get to their gun quick enough before the other person shoots them first anyway.. i'd assume the attacker would generally have the upper hand in most cases :|



  30. 30

    The 2nd amendment gives us the right to form a militia if need be. The reason for this is to prevent tyranny. The 2nd amendment is to protect ourselves against our own government. Their technology has increase, so has ours as far as guns are concerned. OF COURSE these idiotic bimbos know nothing about guns..He wasn't using an assault rifle. I'm 38 seconds into this and they are already spewing incorrect crap. "An assault rifle that can shoot 100rds in .8 seconds..THAT..IS..IMPOSSIBLE. The worst part is people actually believe that. The only damn gun in the world even remotely capable of doing that is a gatlin gun. Even then 100rds in less than a second. IT CANNOT HAPPEN, NO GUN IS CAPABLE OF DOING THAT. He was not shooting a fully automatic weapon. He was shooting a semi-automatic, His large magazine jammed due to firing it too fast which is actually a good thing he used a notoriously unreliable 100rd drum. Once again, they are incorrectly using the term assault rifle. AN ASSAULT RIFLE HAS TO BE CAPABLE OF SHOOTING FULLY AUTOMATIC. HE WAS USING A SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLE. A RIFLE. NOT AN "ASSAULT RIFLE"..Theres the first 38 secs lets see where else this goes.(cont)



  31. 31

    The shooters in Columbine, as well as Virgina tech both did not use the incorrect term 'assault rifle' they used PISTOLS. The Columbine shooting claimed the lives of 13 he used -THIRTEEN- 10 round magazines. The other person used a 52 rd, 32 rd and 28 round mag shooting a total of 55 times. Meaning he only emptied one magazine and a few more. The Virgina tech massacre claimed 32 peoples lives. He used a glock with a 20rd extended mag and A .22….which most people would considering a borderline BB gun. there were 32 deaths.

    All 3 men used a much weaker caliber then what Holmes used in this shooting. With FAR less ammo. Weird, I thought these "assault" rifles were suppose to kill every last breathing thing..Peoples attack on the incorrectly named "assault" rifle holds little to no merit at all. For someone with a much higher caliber with a much higher magazine capacity being IN COMPLETE CONTROL over the situation and he actually claimed less lives than those 3 who uses pistols and much smaller capacities? Right. You can't sit there and go "zomg ban 'assault' rifles because they have too many bullets oh noes" when both major shootings previously were done by pistols, less ammo and CLAIMED more lives. (So far) (cont)



  32. 32

    In a weird, odd way it was actually better that he did indeed use a 100 round high capacity drum mag BECAUSE when someone has a high round limit they are more prone to 'spray and pray' than to take their time and aim. When you have 5 bullets you aim, make sure you're hitting your target, then move onto the next. Clearly this wasn't a problem for the guy at Columbine that reloaded his "small clips" 13 times. Also they are more prone to jamming. Drum mags are notoriously unreliable. Shooting fast as possible your gun will jam, even the brand of ammo would come into play. HIS GUN JAMMED.

    So let me put this in layman's terms. The two previous shootings did not use assault rifles, but rather PISTOLS. The guy that did this shooting was not only using a much more powerful caliber but he also had WAY more ammo on him. He KILLED LESS PEOPLE than the shooters did in Columbine and the guy at Virginia Tech. Even though people were PACKED in a theater. Compared to wide open areas at Virgina tech and Columbine..



  33. 33

    The American right to bear arms was back in the days just after Americans had to defend themselves from the British just after the War of Independance. This isn't 1776.

  34. Zopo says – reply to this


    34

    Why do people need to walk around with a gun? It should be difficult to buy guns and bullets, let alone assault rifles etc

    The easier to buy weapons the more people that have them which has a higher chance of a deranged fool wanting to shoot everybody. Wouldn't you rather have less people with guns, of course the crims will find ways to get the weapons but it could be made more difficult for them.

    Just saying yourself…..

    Ive never seen a gun in my life and to be honest that is a great thing.



  35. 35

    I think it's more simple then to tell "free americans" more of what they can and can not do. It should be a law that if someone is purchasing large ammunition, explosives, etc, that should be investigated, not the family who buys a gun for protection.

    It will always be something, you can't keep taking rights from people bc you will always have crazies.



  36. 36

    Bottom line-he may have gotten the guns legal-but if he was determined to the massacre-he would have found a way to get them regardless if it was legal. Most of the guns involved in gang warfare aren't legal-how is gun control going to stop that. BTW-gun control wouldn't have stopped Timothy McVeigh either. Stopped to bad gossip Perez.

  37. siennagold says – reply to this


    37

    Do we need assault rifles for self-defense???



  38. 38

    Re: rosebud99 – He didn't have an assault rifle. Go to Wikipedia and type in AR-15 and read about it. It is a semi-automatic rifle. The media is throwing the term "assault rifle" around to scare you even more.



  39. 39

    Re: siennagold – Yes. A semi-automatic rifle with a 30rd round clip is no different than a semi-automatic pistol with three 10 round magazines. It's just rifles are more accurate.

    You can defend yourself with -A GUN- not a specific gun.

  40. gps says – reply to this


    40

    I'm really inspired along with your writing abilities and also with the format to your weblog. Is this a paid theme or did you modify it yourself? Anyway keep up the nice high quality writing, it's uncommon to peer a great weblog like this one these days..

  41. digital camera review says – reply to this


    41

    I savor, cause I found exactly what I used to be looking for. You've ended my four day long hunt! God Bless you man. Have a great day. Bye

  42. lotto results checker says – reply to this


    42

    Thank you for every other informative website. The place else could I am getting that type of info written in such a perfect approach? I have a mission that I am simply now running on, and I have been at the glance out for such information.