July 27th, 2012
04:33 PM ET

Time to face facts on gun control

By Fareed Zakaria

It has now been just over a week since a lone gunman opened fire on moviegoers in Aurora, Colorado. The airwaves have been dominated by soul searching.

Most of the pundits have concluded that the main cause of this calamity is the dark, strange behavior of the gunman. Talking about anything else, they say, is silly. The New York Times’ usually extremely wise columnist, David Brooks, explains that this is a problem of psychology, not sociology.

At one level, this makes sense, of course, as the proximate cause. But really, it’s questionable analysis. Think about this: are there more lonely people in America compared with other countries? Are there, say, fewer depressed people in Asia and Europe? So why do they all have so much less gun violence than we do?

The United States stands out from the rest of the world not because it has more nutcases – I think we can assume that those people are sprinkled throughout every society equally –but because it has more guns.

Look at the map below. It shows the average number of firearms per 100 people. Most of the world is shaded light green – those are the countries where there are between zero and 10 guns per 100 citizens. In dark brown, you have the countries with more than 70 guns per 100 people. The U.S. is the only country in that category. In fact, the last global Small Arms Survey showed there are 88 guns for every 100 Americans. Yemen is second at 54. Serbia and Iraq are among the other countries in the top 10.

We have 5 percent of the world's population and 50 percent of the guns.

But the sheer number of guns isn’t an isolated statistic. The data shows we compare badly on fatalities, too.  The U.S has three gun homicides per 100,000 people. That’s four times as many as Switzerland, ten times as many as India, 20 times as many as Australia and England.

Whatever you think of gun rights and gun control, the numbers don’t flatter America.

I saw an interesting graph in The Atlantic magazine recently. A spectrum shows the number of gun-related deaths by state. Now if you add one more piece of data – gun control restrictions – you see that the states with at least one firearm law (such as an assault weapons ban or trigger locks) tend to be the states with fewer gun-related deaths.

Conclusion? Well, there are lots of factors involved, but there is at least a correlation between tighter laws and fewer gun-related deaths.

I've shown you data comparing countries, and comparing states. Now consider the U.S. over time. Americans tend to think the U.S. is getting more violent. In a recent Gallup survey, 68 percent said there’s more crime in the U.S. than there was a year ago. Well, here’s what I found surprising: the U.S. is actually getting safer. In the decade since the year 2000, violent crime rates fell by 20 percent; aggravated assault by 22 percent; motor vehicle theft by 42 percent; murder – by all weapons – by 13 percent.

But guns are the exception. Gun homicide rates haven’t improved at all. They were at roughly the same levels in 2009 as they were in 2000. Meanwhile, serious but non-fatal gun injuries caused during assault have actually increased in the last decade by 20 percent, as guns laws have gotten looser and getting automatic weapons has become easier.

We are the world’s most heavily-armed civilian population. One out of every three Americans knows someone who has been shot.

Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion, but not to his or her own facts. Saying that this is all a matter of psychology is a recipe for doing nothing. We cannot change the tortured psychology of madmen like James Holmes. What we can do is change our gun laws.

Should U.S. gun laws be tougher? What would you change?

soundoff (2,985 Responses)
  1. @dolapoidris

    The only thing to stop a madman with a gun is another person with a gun-Alan Korwin

    July 27, 2012 at 5:07 pm | Reply
    • Larry A.

      Automatic weapons are not easy to get. Due to Al Capone and the roaring twenties it is almost impossible for private citzens to own automatic weapons (machine guns). What you are refering to is semi automatic weapons, 1 trigger pull 1 shot. There is a huge difference. Please get the FACTS right !!!

      July 27, 2012 at 6:47 pm | Reply
      • Lev

        Some, actually quite a few of the assault rifles can easily be converted from semi to fully automatic

        July 27, 2012 at 7:28 pm |
      • sevenseas

        They can be converted illegally, and often result in catastrophic (sometimes fatal) failures of the weapon, the internal parts of a semi auto are often not made to handle being fired automatically

        July 27, 2012 at 7:57 pm |
      • Brian

        Well actually there are still some that are transferrable to civilians. Too bad their prices are sky rocketing to 20k for a registered M16 in 0.223.

        July 27, 2012 at 9:32 pm |
      • virginian76

        did Zakaria makes an oopsie? Mr. Zakaria, I thought you were a pretty smart guy but to say that obtaining automatic weapons is easy is a big lie. Are you a liar? or were you assuming? In the world of Google you can just search what it takes to get a permit for an automatic weapon. First of, you need a Class III permit which can be issued by the ATF if you can pass local and federal criminal back ground check, plus get an approval from your local police department...oh btw if you do get approved.....you are registered with the ATF and your local police department basically means you are tagged and release like some shark...they got their eyes on you for sure. Oh btw a full automatic rifle can average $20k plus it has to be manufactured before May 19, 1986... so if Obama thinks these weapons should be in the hands of our soldiers does he realize that our soldiers today don't use something outdated...

        I hate people, especially the highly educated ones who talk garbage about guns in the media when they don't own a gun and have no idea about what they are, regulations, and so forth. It's like me telling you how to do your job... I don't because I know better.

        Go Google Class III firearms license....

        And... don't writing something about facts when you don't know the facts to begin with.

        July 28, 2012 at 1:01 am |
      • Heknowsitall

        Yea, CNN and the left are all about the facts with guns. I love when they say, "he used a semi automatic weapon"-as if some guy is going to walk in with a musket or something..LOL

        July 28, 2012 at 1:45 am |
      • eqgold

        The details don't really matter, Zakaria is right, it's the sheer number of guns of all types that make the US more and more dangerous for all of us. It's a sick hobby that needs to go away.

        July 28, 2012 at 2:08 am |
      • Rick S.

        Lev that's correct all a person has to do is put an "Auto-Sear" system into the firing mechanism. The thing is that this part is legal to obtain or purchase and is most difficult to imppossible to get. For the gun to be fully automatic is must come original from the manufacture. You're not allowed to alter a semi auto into a full auto weapon in America. As well as, Not many gunsmiths would be willing to convert a gun illegal knowing they could go to prison for up to 10 yrs. And doing hard time in the federal prison is nothing like state prisons. Also, must gunsmiths make very good money. And these people are busy year round. Problem with people is they need to understand ammo. That's the real issue. An Assault rifle just looks different. But we have plenty og rifles which are significantly more powerful than and AR or AK...such as a, 568 caliber, 30-06 cal. 308 cal, 30 cal, 35 cal etc. theres more but I think ppl can get my point. In Switzerland it's required that "every household" have a fully automatic rifle in it. Now that doesnt mean "every person" who's an adult...just the household have at least one of these guns in it. And this is an actual law in Switzerland and they have some of the LOWEST CRIME RATES in the world. Why I dont trust the authors commentary...he always tells one side of the story and of course the side that suits his agenda or beliefs. The author does a dis-services to the readers due to conveying half the story on the subject matter. I have seen the author do this sort of reporting on most if not all of his previous articles.

        July 28, 2012 at 6:50 am |
      • tom

        Larry A. mentions Al Capone and the roaring twenties. There came a moment when back then when there was public outrage over killings using the Thompson sub machine gun and new gun laws came about. However, the violence really only stopped not because of the new gun laws, but because prohibition was repealed and the gangsters lost their reason for fighting – booze became legal.

        We have a similar situation today with the ongoing "drug war". Legalize some or all drugs such as marajuana and a huge proportion of gun related killings (gang related) would most likely stop. We need to address the causes.

        Fareed Zakaria seems to be suggesting that its guns that cause our problem as if somehow the presence of a gun causes people to magically become a monster. I respect Fareed but he's wrong. The USA is a country like no other, on many levels and to make the simple comparison he makes is just not accurate. We have more cars, more single family homes, more of everything than almost every other nation because we have been blessed with wealth.

        We need to stop looking for simple solutions to our nation's problems. All of you know from your daily lives, that life is never simple.

        July 28, 2012 at 7:53 am |
      • geratt

        to some dude Rick S. who claims that Switzerland requires its citizens to have military weapons in the homes. it is because they do not have an standing army, and they are required to go through military training plus yearly training, if you are of military age. only 5% of their military are paid soldiers.

        they also have a health care system in place that requires all people to buy insurance from private firms.

        so if you agree to those changes here in the USA (ie. yearly training and "Obamacare") I say keep your guns.

        since i dont feel like retyping here is some more info from wikipedia:

        "In October 2007, the Swiss Federal Council decided that the distribution of ammunition to soldiers shall stop and that all previously issued ammo shall be returned. By March 2011, more than 99% of the ammo has been received. Only special rapid deployment units and the military police still have ammunition stored at home today.[5]

        When their period of service has ended, militiamen have the choice of keeping their personal weapon and other selected items of their equipment. In this case of retention, the rifle is sent to the weapons factory where the fully automatic function is removed; the rifle is then returned to the discharged owner. The rifle is then a semi-automatic or self-loading rifle."

        July 28, 2012 at 8:11 am |
      • cyberninjar

        Just to clarify, Switzerland does NOT require every household to have a firearm in the house. Switzerland does not have a standing army, instead opting for a peoples Militia to defend their country. The vast majority of men between the ages of 20 and 30 are conscripted into the militia and undergo military training, including weapons training. Due to this fact, the personal weapons of the militia are kept at home as part of the military obligations. Therefore, Switzerland has one of the highest militia gun ownership rates in the world. Note the word "militia" there. Twisted facts are still twisted.

        July 28, 2012 at 9:09 am |
      • Sylar75

        Funny cause the U.S. military prefers for assult rifles to be semi auto due to increased accuracy. So I would say the large capacity clips are more the problem. I've fired fully auto and after the first few rounds it does get hard to keep a tight grouping.

        July 28, 2012 at 9:22 am |
      • obamaliar

        @lev....Hey woodhead...you probably don't know that you have to go thru the same stringent licensure with ATF,FBI, local law enforcement to get a piece to convert a semi auto to full auto that you have to go thru to buy a full auto. Call ATF they will tell you what needs to be done. It's a tough road and then you are subject to unannounced request to produce that weapon on demand.

        July 28, 2012 at 9:49 am |
      • tom


        Funny cause the U.S. military prefers for assult rifles to be semi auto due to increased accuracy.

        Wrong friend. The military version of the AR-15 has two selectable modes, full auto and semi-auto. The civilian version is semi-auto only and cannot be modified for full auto.

        July 28, 2012 at 10:41 am |
      • tom

        They can be converted illegally, and often result in catastrophic (sometimes fatal) failures of the weapon, the internal parts of a semi auto are often not made to handle being fired automatically"

        This is 100% correct. Semi-auto rifles sold in the US are deliberately designed to make conversion extremely difficult. You'd need a highly skilled gunsmith and also a machinist to make specialized parts that cannot be purchased. You'd basically have to replace all the parts in the "receiver" using homemade parts.

        As virginian said, purchasing a fully auto rifle involves finding one in a private collection somewhere (new ones cannot be purchased by civilians) and paying tens of thousands of dollars for it. And taking delivery can only happen AFTER you've gone thru a lengthy process with ATF that can take 6 months. You also need your local police to sign off on it.
        So its possible but extremely expensive.

        July 28, 2012 at 10:57 am |
      • nina

        "Yea, CNN and the left are all about the facts with guns. I love when they say, "he used a semi automatic weapon"-as if some guy is going to walk in with a musket or something..LOL"
        What would you like the reporters to say? lol

        July 28, 2012 at 11:42 am |
      • TahoeBlu

        @virginia. It is only tough to get licensed to own a fully automatic. You can VERY easily buy conversion kits and do it your self. So stop whining and crying that Z hurt your feelings.

        July 28, 2012 at 12:05 pm |
      • kiss

        Please. I have an IQ of 60 and still can see clearly what is the reason behind gun control. In the next few years US economy will collapse or dollar will hyperinflate, so people will loose homes and won't be able to feed. Angry people will take their guns and march towards the same politicians and bankers who created this mess. Because the people will outnumber soldiers and police by 1000 to 1, they know that they won't be able to stop them. I mean if they won't take guns, politicians will be cooked alive and will be a bloodshed, and they know that. If guns will be taken away people will be killed in concentration camps or die from femine or be killed by criminals who will have guns and destroy every house. Health care law was just shade, because it was a stepping stone to see how far they can go. Now there is momentum and the next thing will be second amendment. I mean the only thing you need to check is Gold price. EVen worse because gold price today artificially lowered by so called derivatives or short selling or promise to sell you a gold at today's price in the future, and you get that today's gold price is at least 40 times lower then it suppose to be, because if you take all the paper money that is in circulation around the world and buy with it all physical gold that US has, you get that at today's price only few percents would get their gold, other would not because there would be not enough physical gold and to satisfy every's demand the gold price should go up to 50,000 dollars to back all the paper money that is in circulation. Why gold? Because gold is indirectly linked to oil price in Middle east and other Oil exporting countries. And everythinng else depends from Oil. So this still continues and Middle east allows that to happen because they know too, but it can't last forever and soon will be very very bad, and if you won't have your gun to protect yourself you will be in great danger.

        July 28, 2012 at 12:34 pm |
      • joe a

        I'm very disappointed that Fareed would post this piece with such mis-information. "automatic weapons" are heavily restricted.

        July 28, 2012 at 1:24 pm |
      • Archie Bunker

        "Some, actually quite a few of the assault rifles can easily be converted from semi to fully automatic"

        Really? Please explain your assinine facts.

        July 28, 2012 at 2:11 pm |
      • Jean Sartre

        FACT: Semi-automatic guns can be turned into FULL-AUTOMATIC in about 10-miniutes... either by purchasing a $50.00 kit on the Internet or if you know your way around guns, by anyone with a little basic knowledge...


        July 28, 2012 at 3:03 pm |
      • Ryan in Texas

        Look at the Map. MEXICO AND SYRIA HAVE LESS GUNS. So they are safer?

        July 28, 2012 at 3:04 pm |
      • abnguy

        Zakaria either lied or is ignorant when he said getting automatic firearms is easier. In fact it is harder due to not being able to by new automatic weapons. The only change in gun laws is the repeal of draconic firearms restrictions. It is very hard to convert new semi-automatic guns to full auto.

        July 28, 2012 at 3:34 pm |
      • rrock

        You can split hairs about fully automatic, the ease of getting a weapon etc. The issue is that the CO shooter had a semi automatic and was able to shoot more people because he had an assault weapon. The only purpose these weapons serve it to shoot people quickly. So why are they legal? Should we legalize rocket propelled grenades or anti tank weapons too? They serve no purpose either.

        The point of the article is that more guns and less regulation make us less safe.

        July 28, 2012 at 4:45 pm |
      • doughnuts

        No, Lev, they can't. It takes a good gun-smith (or another kind of talented machinist) to convert to full auto.

        Plus, it is highly illegal to do so, for all parties involved.

        July 28, 2012 at 4:58 pm |
      • WAYNE C

        Hey guys- the AR was simi-auto not a assault gun, and guess what, (thank the lord) it jammed,like they did in VIET-NAM. I would guess most of the people hurt was with the shotgun. Is it an assault gun also ?

        July 28, 2012 at 8:21 pm |
      • Hans Dorfwald

        STOP using Switzerland in your pro gun arguments, you are making yourself look ignorant.

        Guns in Switzerland are a very diffrent story. Private ownership and collecting is regulated with private ownership of military weapons being prohibited by law. The military weapons in our homes are not ours they are the militaries and there are rules, restrictions and penalties for using them without proper authority. Many Swiss chose to hand them in after their service as they do not want an assault rifle or hand gun in their home. These weapons are for military use not for private paranoid protection.

        We are a very content society, we are not lonley, disenfranchized, and angry with the world. That is why we do not have as many gun crimes. It is not because of our arms.

        By the way we do have a small standing army, who do you think flys our F18 and trains our militia.

        July 28, 2012 at 9:06 pm |
      • Flynn

        It never ceases to amaze me how irrational these NRA types are about their guns. I don't see how anyone can refute the core point of this article... "more guns does not make people safer". Instead these nuts pick at one minor assertion they disagree with ("automatic weapons are easy to get"), as if that negates the rest of the statistics here. Would you feel more comfortable if you knew EVERYONE in the theater was carrying a pistol? Give me a break... Somebody needs to get through to these people. Thank you, mr. Zakaria!

        July 28, 2012 at 11:34 pm |
      • Dirk

        In response to Lev and Sevenseas, it may be easy to convert a semi to an automatic, however the average person doesn't know that and so I would argue that someone that knows this and knows how to do it is not concerned about gun laws.

        July 29, 2012 at 3:52 am |
      • Jasonb

        To Virginian76 –
        Mr Zakaria is not only a liar, he is definitely not American. Too many times he stands for everything that is anti-American so he clearly h8's us. Zakaria, go back home to whatever country you came from and whatever rock you crawled out from under.

        July 29, 2012 at 7:31 am |
      • Don

        Still very rapid fire seeing that one can squeeze a finger many times in a minute... now if there was a fail-safe time delay of 2-minutes on one, that might be acceptable.

        July 29, 2012 at 8:50 am |
      • Molon Lave

        @Lev. Yes they can, but try to buy those parts. they are controlled just like the machine guns are.
        You have to pay a $200 tax for each one, and keep the ATF informed of where it is under lock and key.

        More people were killed by doctors in the US last year than by guns by a factor of 10:1

        July 29, 2012 at 8:56 am |
      • milpitasguy

        Yes, it is illegal to convert semi-auto to full auto but perfectly legal to sell the conversion kits. I've seen those frequently advertised on gun mags.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:42 am |
      • CHRIS

        It is due to Ronald Ragan. Not AL. RR is why the avaerage man cannot afford an automatic gun. It will cost you 10 grand or better and it has to already be registered before like 1985. Not sure of the date.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:44 am |
      • alcap

        I don't own a gun, but the number of expert opinions I read here, about what is a semi and an auto, how to convert one to the other, etc, etc give the certainty that Zacharia is right, we are a society of gun experts with easy access to these killing devices. Opinions are opinions, but facts are facts. Please don't shoot me for that...

        July 29, 2012 at 9:47 am |
      • Stan

        Yes, semi-automatic weapons can be conferted to fully automatic weapons. And as soon as you fire it anyone who hears a full-auto burst will call the cops, and you will be charged with a felony. You will serve 10 years in a federal prison and you will never be legally allowed to have a gun of any kind as long as you live.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:49 am |
      • buckybadger

        I think you need your facts straight. It is very easy to get an automatic weapon. Just go to a gun show. It really is that easy. Remember this guy got his legally.

        July 29, 2012 at 10:14 am |
      • Mike

        OK. So we want to own guns, but why do we need a clip that can fire 100 rounds?

        July 29, 2012 at 10:27 am |
      • tonyh110

        Lev – you need to be a competent machinist and know what to do – BUT if you do convert and you dont have a class 3 then you face immediate 10 years federal prison WHEN (not IF) caught. What criminal is going to go to all that fuss – he can obtain a full auto easier on the black market

        July 29, 2012 at 10:31 am |
      • scott bleyle

        One of the skills that kept Afghanistan free of Soviet domination was their ability to make full-auto AK 47's in a cave,without any power but their hands and minds.That's when Russia knew they would never conquer,and left.

        July 29, 2012 at 10:42 am |
      • Cory


        "Wrong friend. The military version of the AR-15 has two selectable modes, full auto and semi-auto. The civilian version is semi-auto only and cannot be modified for full auto."

        I'm afraid YOU are wrong, my friend. The M16A2 and the current issue M4/M4A1 are both "selective rate" fire weapons- in 'automatic' mode, it fires a 3-round burst- 3 rounds for 1 trigger pull. These weapons are not fully automatic by definition since they do not continuously fire until the magazine is empty- there's a big difference there.

        July 29, 2012 at 10:55 am |
      • PaulC

        One trigger pull, one bullet time 100 with spare magazines. Yeah, a real difference.
        I feel safe knowing my nutcase neighbor is well armed in case I annoy him.

        July 29, 2012 at 10:57 am |
      • K. Forsyth

        Forget the "automatic weapons"; they are not the point of the piece. This article is filled with statistics, and you are all concentrating on one sentence! The sentence is merely an addendum! Are you unable to refute the rest of his article? Is that why you focus on this one statement? Also, read for comprehension guys. He doesn't say it is "easy" to get automatic weapons. Only that it is easier. Surely it was more difficult to obtain an automatic weapon while the Federal assault weapons ban was in place than it is now, is it not?

        July 29, 2012 at 11:00 am |
      • Tom

        Larry, want to know how easy and legal it is? Look up slide fire kits. Scary what can be purchased mail order.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:03 am |
      • Dave

        Semi auto weapons cannot be "easily" converted to full auto despite the glib statements made by the ignorant that they can be. And if some does have the armorer skills to do it, it is illegal.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:05 am |
      • PaulC

        WAYNE C.
        An M-16 used by the military is definitely an assault rifle. The .223 is NOT anything similar to the .22 you plunk tin cans and squirrels with. The .223 only refers to the diameter but the (M16) AR-15 uses a much heavier round with much more powder and is a deadly killing machine. Having seen Viet Kong hit with the .223 you could never mistake the two.
        The civilian (AR15) semi-automatic version with the extended magazine can spit out 100 rounds in about 1 minute and extra magazines can turn you into a one man army in a crowded theater, bus or train.
        Fortunately this moron did not know how to operate or care for the weapon or many more would have been killed.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:08 am |
      • JimSalem

        A lot of people here seem to be concerned with one single point in the entire article, semi-auto vs auto. I don't recall any recent mass murder involving automatic weapons. You're simply upset that someone is telling it like it is, and you don't want to face the truth about your hobby.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:23 am |
      • matokuwapi

        Semi – auto, vs Auto...seems a rather moot point, when you think about the damage caused in Colorado was with a semi auto weapon and a shot gun. Isn't that enough? As for conversion... it only takes a moron that can read a little to find out how its done. It's called GOOGLE.

        All you have to do is look at the number of gun deaths in Canadian cities and compare them with cities of the same size in the US to get an idea of what at least some gun controls have. Canada has a lot of guns per capita. More than most countries (we're dark green on the map)...but the real difference between the US and Canada is the type of guns allowed and the controls on them.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:34 am |
      • siteyoursource

        more people killed or injured? your data is incomplete. how many bad guys were included in your numbers. If a ccw permit holder(who has a more strick background check than police,and many times better trained with firearms) stops a bad guy by shooting him, do you count that death in your data.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:44 am |
      • davedave2

        i am not scared or paranoid so i never bought a gun

        July 29, 2012 at 11:54 am |
      • David1958

        @virginian76 'I hate people..' Wow, anti-social much?

        July 29, 2012 at 12:39 pm |
      • rrock

        Well if assault weapons are legal we might as well make rocket propelled grenades, bazookas and TNT legal.

        July 29, 2012 at 12:42 pm |
      • Tommy

        A person can make a deadly bomb with household cleaners... should we outlaw bleach as well?

        July 29, 2012 at 12:50 pm |
      • Trace Alexander

        It's easier for me to obtain automatic weapons than it is for me to find alcohol.

        July 29, 2012 at 12:58 pm |
      • Eric

        Hans Dorfwald, please stop posting facts about Switzerland. You are ruining the image right wing gun nuts project here about the gun utopia that is Switzerland, where everyone is required to have a military assault style weapon in their home and consequently there is zero crime.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:30 pm |
      • DanRyanMan

        Funny. All these commentators seem to be experts in guns and gun operating mechanism. But most of them cannot write grammatically correct sentences.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:37 pm |
      • zooni

        As someone who has used both in the military, it is very easy to convert most semi to full auto and if you fire full auto you fire small bursts. When people talk about automatic weapons, the category includes full auto and semi auto. So both technically and in though the article is correct. Ban weapons to mentally challenged individuals and the murder rate would drop measurably.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
      • Andres Romero

        I don't think he said that automatic weapons are easy to get from what I can read in the article, I think he said they have gotten EASIER to get, there is a big difference. They may still be difficult to get, but it is easier than it used to be. I don't know anything about gun permits or owning a gun, but I know about reading an article, and that is what I see Zakaria meant from what I can understand. Also, no matter how many permits you have to get, it is still easier to get an automatic weapon in the USA where they are allowed than in any other country where they are not allowed, at least in a legal and lawful manner.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:18 pm |
      • Rob

        Larry, what is the difference between the speed of a double action revolver and that of a Semi-Auto pistol? I shoot PPC weekly and use a semi-auto pistol, I have a hard time getting off the required 12 shots in 20 seconds unless everything goes perfectly. Yet the other gentlemen using the double action revolvers manage to fire 6 rounds, reload, and fire 6 more rounds and still have a few seconds remaining. Also, the double action revolvers are more stable to shoot, my M&P is far harder to hold on target mainly due to less mass and shorter barrel. Revolvers also have far fewer jamming issues, semi's have a lot of inherent disadvantages in a gun fight. Sure the mentality is to use a semi, but go to a gun shop and ask for you best home defense weapon and they always show you a shotgun because it can do more damage faster.

        Point is... If the CO Killer really wanted results, the shotgun should have been his best choice with more lead shot dispersed down range per trigger pull, faster. The semi auto pistol would have actually been a handicap and less effective, really wrong tool for the job. The lose of life could have been double or triple if he would have focused on the shot gun. The AR15 was not much better either in a confined, poorly lite theater. There is another double action revolver he could have used that shoots 410 shells.

        The anti gun people love and over use the "What If" statement, so I feel I have a license to use it here. What if this CO Killer would have not been able to get a gun legally, what if he could not have obtained one illegally, what if he went to the hardware store bought some 8" sections of 1" pipe and some off the shelf containers of high performance gun powder.

        These arm chair quarterbacks working for the media do not have a clue as to what they are talking about. Why doesn't that clown mention what might have happened if the theater were not a gun free zone. The killer was so concerned for his own safety that he wore body armor..., if ONE person would have returned fire, it would have been all over. Too bad the theater forced everyone to be a victim. Go watch the video on youtube where the guy in Florida ended that ordeal. Those Florida bad guys had only one thing in mind when they saw someone had a gun and that was run. That was a two against one situation, the two bad guys had an assault semi auto hand gun and an assault baseball bat against an older guy with a small pistol who, by the way, was not forced into being a victim.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:21 pm |
      • ryan

        Hans Dorfwald,
        You kid yourself if you think Switzerland does not have lonely and angry people. The US is also a much larger and compact in terms of population than Switzerland.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
      • carson

        Automatic weapon does not mean "machine gun"... a pistol that reloads another round every time it is fired is called an automatic weapon. With a level 3 firearms lisc you can buy "fully automatic" weapons and that kind of lisc is open to all law abiding citizens. I own several weapons myself and do not think for one second that taking the weapons away from lawfull persons such as myself will do a bit of good in keeping gun violence down. the people that want to use them frfor harm and to commit crimes will always be able to find them.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
      • UtahProf

        ANY semi-automatic weapon can be converted to a "drop bolt" automatic with a little mechanical knowledge (highly illegal). HOWEVER, guns that are not designed to be fully automatic seldom work properly. In the case of an "assault rifle" – specifically the black rifle platform – if you do not have mil-spec m16 parts – bolt, bolt carrier, etc, it is not going to perform consistently without malfunction – even to the point of stove-piping and blowing up in your hands – this would mean just using the auto-sear parts (again, illegal to install) and changing nothing else. The point here is that tere are already very strict laws in place covering automatic weapons – people who are intending to commit crimes are not worried about the rule of law. In the end, explosives, poison gasses, etc are probably more effective and can be made (from scratch) with a trip to Lowes/Wal Mart/Seed and Feed Store – it only takes about $15 and 15 minutes to turn out a good-sized batch of gunpowder or even ANFO and $10 and 60 seconds to whip up a batch of deadly gas. (even a single shot musket/pistol made from scratch is just $20 and a couple of hours worth of work away). Where there are people intent on evil, they will find a way. The boggest question is, "Does everyone want to at least have the opportunity to defend themselves?" ... And, of course, gun ownership, as defined in the Second Amendment is all about protection from a tyrannical government and has nothing to do with hunting or personal protection – even though those are good secondary benefits.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
      • Pete

        A rubber band placed around the trigger can make a semi fire like an automatic weapon. With a 100 round rotary magazine you now have a machine gun. The NRA needs to focus on our right to own rubber bands.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:26 pm |
      • UtahProf

        Very good post, Rob!

        July 29, 2012 at 2:28 pm |
      • JCB


        EXACTLY, every time something like this horrible massacre happens, ONLY CERTAIN FACTS are discussed or exposed, not the BIG PICTURE which is much more complicated than just gun ownership. And in fact has very little to do with it. Thanks for your intelligent and EXPOSING picture of the skewed and slanted reporting by the media and anti gun lobby.

        Excuse typo's keyboard battery is low.....tired of fixing all mistakes 🙂

        July 29, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
      • Jimmy B.

        Zakaria points out that we have many per guns per person then the rest of the world and your only response is that he misstated one small piece issue? Get with the program Larry!!! The point is that we have too many guns!! And whether they are semi-automatic or fully automatic is not the key issue! See how it works?

        July 29, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
      • gfunk1865

        It would be nice if people actually referred to unbiased data regarding gun crime as well. The Brady Campaign or the NRA are not sources anyone should be going by. And gallop polls do not represent facts.

        Homicide Facts released by FBI for year 2010:
        Handgun caused 6,009 deaths
        Shotguns caused 373 deaths
        rifles (of any kind) caused 352 deaths

        While firearms related homicides accounted for nearly 8,500 of the 12,000 to 13,000 homicides, there were other notable stats

        Knifes cause 1700 deaths
        hand to hand cause 700+
        blunt objects caused 500+

        But it is interesting that even though handguns account for the majority of firearms related homicides... we are talking about rifles................. which don't even come close.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
      • UtahProf

        Jimmy, who is to decide how many is "too many"? You? Fareed? The government? The UN? Maybe you have too many pairs of shoes? Too many cars? Too much money? See how it works?

        July 29, 2012 at 2:41 pm |
      • Chris

        the semi vs auto is a moot point... However, as Flynn said" do you want everybody in the theater to have a pistol" well Flynn answer me this. If everybody in that theater had a gun how many people do you think would have died other than the gunman?? It definety would not have been 12. It takes a person to pull that trigger. How can we not see the true problem. It's not the fact that he had a gun, it's that he was willing to use it. People need to focus on raising there kids properly or realizing that there kid might have mental issues!!

        July 29, 2012 at 3:17 pm |
      • James Baker

        yes Larry there is a difference between auto and semi-auto, but in the context of Zakaria's article it is not significant. The weapons used in all of the mass murders I can recall are semi-autos, which are very easy to obtain. One trigger pull – one bullet with a semi-auto is good enough to shoot 70-80 people in a few minutes. Isn't that the problem we're dealing with? To jump on the distinction between full auto and semi-auto is to be technically correct, but to miss the underlying premise of the article. We are a nation of gun zealots and because we lack common sense to curb the availability of 100-round magazines, and the easy availability of guns at "gun shows", we simply accept mass murders as the unfortunate price we pay for maintaining the 2nd Amendment. It doesn't have to be that way.

        July 29, 2012 at 3:20 pm |
      • Degs G

        Talk about missing the point.

        July 29, 2012 at 3:43 pm |
      • ConcernedCiti

        Larry A, you seem like a typically NRA right winder intent on misleading the public. I know of a couple of neighbors that have "so-called" semi automatics, that can be converted to FULL automatic, with a small kit. I have seen these weapons in actions at the range (yes, I have a personal revolver myself) and they are mindbogglingly devastating! No reason to have assault weapons unless you plan to go to war!

        July 29, 2012 at 4:03 pm |
      • Yuyunner

        "Well if assault weapons are legal we might as well make rocket propelled grenades, bazookas and TNT legal."

        That's true. The only thing to stop multiple mad men with guns is a person with a rocket propelled grenade, bazooka, or TNT. Also, rocket propelled grenades, bazookas, and TNT do not kill people, its the people who use them that kill people. So due to these two facts, all weapons should be made available to the general public... you know, for the obvious reason of protection.

        July 29, 2012 at 4:16 pm |
      • CB007

        There are a number of vidoes of Semi-auto AKA-47 being shot with a 30 round clip on YouTube(I see indications on line that you can actually get your hands on a 300 round clip as well). I don't know if he is pulling the trigger really fast or not but the man firing mananged to empty his clip in seconds. Semi-auto or full auto, does it matter? 30 rounds in a few seconds – the only thing holding him back was the size of his clip, that's the real problem. If clip size were limited to 10 then he would have to reload or drop his weapon and grab a new one – that would slow him down. The semi-auto vs full-auto isn't really the issue – its clip size.

        July 29, 2012 at 4:31 pm |
      • Alex

        Semi-automatic is still a form of automatic guys

        July 29, 2012 at 4:41 pm |
      • Susan Neumann

        This is so true. It is almost impossible to get "machine" guns. Very thorough vetting by FBI, ATF, Home land Security. Few nut cases pass this rigorous process.

        July 29, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
      • Daniel

        Your all idiots, well most of you, what you fail to realize is how the hell did someone who is "mentally insane" get fully auto guns legally, they gave him the guns to go and shoot lots of people so they could come up with an excuse to get all the anti gun morons to agree to take away our guns so they could have controll of us when the falling out happens in the US and if you don't have a gun when that happens I feel sorry for you. I say if you have a gun and someone comes to your front door with some papers and a uniform saying give me your guns shoot him right in his skull and be ready for a fight cause if you don't the aftermath of what will be when you give him your guns shall be far worse

        July 29, 2012 at 6:33 pm |
      • Acoelomate

        I hate that reasonable attempts to discuss gun policy always degenerate into a gun nerd discussion. So I'll add to it. Originally the term "automatic firearm" refered to to any self-loading firearm, and still does in most of the world. The division into semi and full is a concern for enthusiasts, and does not bear on the argument. You guys are the equivalent of geologists who will not allow a discussion on the danger of throwing rocks at people because what was thrown may actually have been a mineral. Except that geologists are smart.

        July 29, 2012 at 6:36 pm |
      • Frank Castle

        This column is full of many well-intentioned people; but the whole lot of you are ignorant as hell. YOU DO *NOT* have to have a "Class 3 License" to own a fully-automatic weapon, silencer, sawed off shotgun, short-barreled rifle, or silencer.
        You must only purchase an NFA tax stamp for the cost of $200., plus two fully filled out NFA Form 4s, with two sets of fingerprints, two photographs, and a proof of citizenship form. Then you get the royal, federal background check which makes an anal probe by space aliens seem like a GOOD THING. Then you have to actually pay for the cost of the device in question. Most machineguns go for $15,000-$250,000. EACH. There hasn't been a SINGLE CRIME committed with a legally registered machinegun since 1937. Get your facts straight. Modern firearms BELONG IN EVERY HOME. The NRA doesn't brainwash its members–it only serves to protect our civil rights and ensures that we as Americans will always have the means to protect ourselves from violent criminals, and if need be-a tyrannical government, as our founders designed. If you are stupid enough to believe that you can actually make innocent people safer by disarming them-I would like to know exactly what planet you're from-so we can declare war on it and destroy it so the rampant stupidity that spawned it doesn't spread. Police can't protect you 24/7. Hell, they can't protect you 1/1. The police simply can't be everywhere at once-and tell me exactly which violent criminal will actually let you call 9-1-1 and calmly articulate your name, location, and situation while you're fighting for your life? The writer of this column not only has the IQ of a houseplant, but lacks a single shred of common sense. The only statistic that you need to remember is this: More guns = fewer violent crimes. Bottom line.

        July 29, 2012 at 6:43 pm |
      • Gold-n-Gunz

        Larry A., you are so correct, one trigger pull one fire is simply a semi-automatic weapon, a machine gun has the continuously fire until emptied or you let go of the trigger and they are not easily converted.
        Next was there no one trained and carrying a weapon concealed or otherwise that could have intervened and stopped this lunatic as he was inflicting his terrorism on our Americans? What's funny is everyone first thing wanted to blow up the World over some one attacking our World Trade Center, but when someone goes into a movie theater and opens fire on the crowd, we want the USA to give up their guns...it's was not the guns, it was not that we don't have laws in place for gun control and safety. We simply can't enforce the laws we have, so, it really makes sense to make more laws, let's get the enforcement up, find out why and how this guy got his weaponry and ammunition, was he under a Dr.'s care for being unstable? Why and how did he go un-noticed. what can we do about this?
        Did anyone read that the USA won three Gold's for the Olympic Shooting Team...GO USA!!!

        July 29, 2012 at 6:55 pm |
      • jatovi

        The gun show loop hole makes it easy.

        July 29, 2012 at 8:45 pm |
      • queenbee10

        Opinions about gun control ignore that prior to the availability of semi automatics and automatics–we had mass murders.

        Weapons ranged from axes to gas and poisons to knives. What has remained consistent in the cases of wholesale murder is WHO overwhelmingly performs such acts:

        Usually... a male–ages 14-65.

        Usually a white male–you can count the number of black, hispanic, asians, etc combined on both hands and feet but the number of white males who have committed either mass murder or serial killings number in the high dozens.

        We can argue that the men and women who kill are mentally ill or under great stress. We can argue that familial killings are different from killing strangers. We can even argue the method and ease of access to guns or poisons etc–here is what does not change:

        9 times out of 10–the killer will be a male.

        8 times out of 10 the killer will be white

        6 times out of 10 the killer will know at least some of his victims

        6 times out of 10 the killer will also kill himself

        10 times out of 10 no matter how this plays out–unless the killer is a minority–the media and the blogging public will never relate the crime to race or wonder what is wrong within the white race and specifically with white males.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:36 pm |
      • Mel

        Semi-automatics are referred to in popular discourse as "automatic." Don't be so snooty.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:40 pm |
      • Steve in Iowa

        @ Tom... "Slide Fire" is a stock, not a trigger assembly. I have one, loads of fun!! Gotta get ammo in bulk tho, 500 rounds at the range is pretty normal.

        As far as the article, anyone that's willing to gamble, negotiate, compromise, or argue about my Rights, Freedom's and Liberty, I will consider to be my enemy. Remember folks, part of your freedom is allowing me to be free.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:16 pm |
      • Jack Hargreaves

        There is absolutely NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER to the victims, whether they are killed by an "automatic" weapon or a "semi automatic" weapon is completely irrelevent, just so sad that that you and the rest of the "gun loving 2nd Amendment Brigade" can't see that.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:21 pm |
      • Steve in Iowa

        @ Jatovi.... There is no such thing as a "gun show loophole". You've been watching and listening to the Brady's for far too long. Private sales between citizens should be no concern of the government, or anyone else for that matter. If you suspect the buyer may be a little 'shady', you're absolutely free to not sell it to them.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:30 pm |
      • Jack Hargreaves

        I tried sending this before, but I don't know if it went, however if you believe that " more guns equals less crime" then by taking that to its ultimate conclusion, if 100% of the population had guns, there would be no crime.Now, who agrees with that? Hands up please.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:35 pm |
      • PatMcCarthy

        The people who act like guns are the root of all evil are either ignorant, narrow-minded, or just plain out of touch with reality. Take a look at Washington DC, for example. If you have a handgun you have to keep it disassembled in a lock box. Yet they have one of the highest murder rates in the U.S. It's the same with Chicago; strict gun laws and high violent crime rates. If you take guns away from people, they become victims of the people who confiscate the guns. The 2nd Amendment gives us the right to own guns not to only protect our homes from intruders, but it guarantees us protection from a tyrannical government. The reason the 2nd Amendment is the shortest Amendment in the Bill of Rights is because our founders knew the dangers of an unarmed public. They knew that they had to keep the people protected from the intrusion of Big Government, so they wrote down the 2 sentences that make up the 2nd Amendment. Disarming the American people has been the main goal of the UN for the past 20 years. It's all about Agenda 21. Remember that Agenda 21? The 21 means the 21st century. Guess what century we're in? The UN has already started their globalist/socialist agenda with the "green" movement. Now it's time to move to disarming the people. Remember what JFK said, "If you make a peaceful revolution impossible, then you make a violent revolution inevitable." I say we get out of the UN, give every man, women, and child the means to protect themselves, and get the government out of our personal lives.

        July 30, 2012 at 12:09 am |
      • Jeff

        To the individual who compared the US to Switzerland in terms of gun ownership and crime: You left out an important piece of intellectual reasoning (which is doing a dis-services to the readers due to conveying half the story on the subject matter), Switzerland has no standing army. Men receive compulsory training and then stand by as a militia keeping the weapons at home. The US has the most powerful standing army in the world, the comparison cherry picks the "facts" to suit your purpose. The idea that every US citizen needs a gun to be a militia is ludicrous as WE HAVE A STANDING ARMY ALREADY.

        July 30, 2012 at 2:15 am |
      • Sevinthseal

        The web is FULL of do-it-yourself videos for converting assault weapons to fully-automatic. Don't be a bonehead.

        July 30, 2012 at 8:15 am |
      • Nick

        Funny cause the U.S. military prefers for assult rifles to be semi auto due to increased accuracy.

        Wrong friend. The military version of the AR-15 has two selectable modes, full auto and semi-auto. The civilian version is semi-auto only and cannot be modified for full auto.

        No Tom, you're wrong, the "military version of the AR-15" also known as an M16, has a 3 position mode selection switch; safe, semi, and 3 round burst...not fully auto for the exact reason Sylar stated, accuracy.

        July 30, 2012 at 9:01 am |
      • Bobby D.

        Good point made, I was about to make suggestion that full auto weapons are not easy to obtain, especially in the state I live in where we have the most lax gun laws. Through proper paperwork we can own a full auto, problem is that it takes an act of God to get the paperwork approved. One other thing is that class III weapons arent cheap. A full auto M16 at a gun shop I frequent costs 18,000. I cant think of any person that has that kind of money just to throw down for a gun.
        Im so tired of journalists putting a stereotype that weapons like AK's, MAC-10's or UZI's come fully auto ready for the average gun owner to pick up.. Funny how they dont understand semi auto and full auto.

        July 30, 2012 at 10:25 am |
      • jutay24

        Pretty sure that automatic firearms have been banned since 1962. I know that there are class III licenses out there however from my understanding they are extremely difficult to come by. Everything is semi automatic.

        July 30, 2012 at 11:23 am |
      • terryrayc


        It wasn't a fully automatic, it was semi. Also it jammed and most of the shooting he did wasn't with the AR it was with a shotgun. As you all said, facts are facts.

        For those who are saying you can get a conversion kit for $50.00 easy...guess what...if you plan to use that update you're will...those kits will probably kill you. A good proper kit will run you $600+ depending on the weapon. Also you still need to know what you are doing. Yes selling the kit is legal...however using the kit will land you in jail. I looked into a Class III license, I can get it, I've got a good relation with the local police and I have nothing in my brackground...I also have military training.....I gave up when I found out the time, the cost and the headache. The real problem isn't assault weapons or fully automatics...it's the criminals/ Gun laws will not stop the gangs nor the thieves or the crazies out there. All gun laws really do is ramp up the underground market...If they were enforced. I'm sorry I think we just need to close some loopholes. Why can I not go into a gun store and walk out with a handgun(To be honest I can because I have a CWP) but I can walk into a gun show and walk out with anything I want. We need to close that loop hole and we need to do more to close shop on the underground gun dealers....I'm sorry but people selling guns out of their trunk are part of the major problem with gun laws.

        July 30, 2012 at 12:37 pm |
      • hewen

        more ppl die each year due to motor vehicle accidents than gun related deaths.... should we make more restrictions on whos allowed to own cars too?

        July 30, 2012 at 12:40 pm |
      • fareed_looser

        Maybe you should just go back to where you came from. We are not interested in becoming Europe, Asia, or anyplace else, despite our coward-in-chief's attempts.

        July 30, 2012 at 1:45 pm |
      • Mike

        to Geratt: You need to get your facts straight. Switzerland does have a standing army and active reserve units. Standing army is around ~150k with about half that in active reserves. They have something like 5-6 active brigades and fully functioning and staffed air bases. The requirement to have a government issued gun is "the next step" in selective service for the country.

        While true that there is a "compulsory" insurance requirement, the Swiss have one of the lowest corporate tax rates in Europe and one of the less regulated overall business environments to encourage growth. Make these changes and we'll talk about Obamacare.

        July 30, 2012 at 2:21 pm |
      • Scotti

        I love how people know things without doing any research. Do some research and you will find that it is in fact very easy to get an assault rifle. You can debate about automatic or semi-automatic all you want. That is not the important factor.

        July 30, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
      • Jerry

        firstly, any citizen can own a fully automatic rifle, go get your class 3 firearms license. simple. also to the guy who said semi auto can easily be converted to full auto. that is true on some rifles liek the sks however its also illegal and you could face up to 10 years in prison for doing it. I own plenty of pistols and rifles, none of which have committed any crimes or murders. Gun control isnt what we need, we need a better system to screen and weed out the crazies from purchasing them.

        July 30, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
      • Jose Pineda

        qgold wrote that "The details don't really matter, Zakaria is right, it's the sheer number of guns of all types that make the US more and more dangerous for all of us. It's a sick hobby that needs to go away."
        OK, OK! I give up. Let's make the US safer for "all of us". First, start with heart disease, then cars. We need to regulate even more. After all, heart disease kills 192 per 100,00. more than 60 times greater than guns. Then, move to cars.After all, cars account for 15 deaths for every 100,000. 5 times more than guns. After the US is made safer for all of us by tackling those REALLY two big killers, let's talk about guns....!!! You know, I'm not normally one to call people names, but II'm making an excpetion for THESE IDIOTS.

        July 30, 2012 at 2:47 pm |
      • GrayFox

        Intelligent people splitting hairs "automatic" "semi-automatic", yes, Zak made a bubu, so what? too many people die because there are too many weapons.. period.

        July 30, 2012 at 2:59 pm |
      • jlv

        Now if you add one more piece of data – gun control restrictions – you see that the states with at least one firearm law (such as an assault weapons ban or trigger locks) tend to be the states with fewer gun-related deaths.

        Funny how most violence and death is caused by handguns, yet these unrelated anti-gun laws have somehow reduced gun deaths. I wonder what the other death stats and economic stats are like in these states. Because those laws don't stop gun or any other violence or any kind of accidents from happening. So those screaming about how zakaria is right on facts seem to be wrong on facts, and if he were right politicians would be quick to hop on the band wagon.

        July 30, 2012 at 6:29 pm |
      • cnpsych18

        "kiss' – i agree with one part of your post...you have an IQ of 60.

        July 30, 2012 at 10:21 pm |
      • Sandra

        In nearly every discussion I have seen about gun control, someone very sternly reminds us that there is a big difference between semi-automatic and automatic firearms. In nearly every case, they are railing against an argument that has not been made. Most people who are not gun aficionados do not make a differentiation in comments because most of them do not see much of a difference. Most semi-automatic guns are easily converted into automatic. And nearly every time I have done a per-page search on the word "automatic" it is only used by those writing in defense of semi-automatic guns. For the rest of us, we seem to just call them "guns."

        July 31, 2012 at 5:01 am |
      • jlv

        The laws that are being used to prove the point are mutualy exclusive from the arguement. It is like argueing that to stop vehicular homicide we should ban SUV's and promote seatbelts.

        July 31, 2012 at 11:16 am |
      • One Trigger Pull One Shot

        Not an auto rate of fire? That's true. Hmmm...That means that someone shooting a SEMI-AUTOMATIC gun could only fire about 40 Rounds in a minute. Hardly worth mentioning? Please – Can I tell you where to stash your BS.

        July 31, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
      • Bill

        Larry A. Right... However, you get the point...

        August 2, 2012 at 9:52 am |
      • JOE

        Wasting your breath. Democratic Socialists do not know the difference between semi-automatic and an automatic weapons. Just like their ignorance about truth and logic as opposed to their fantasy of "Hope and Change." They can keep the hope and I will keep my change.

        December 15, 2012 at 7:24 pm |
    • Eric

      Fareed conveniently neglected to mention that cities with the strongest gun control (eg. Washington DC and Chicago) have the highest murder rates. Maine doesn't even require a permit for concealed carry, and they have virtually no crime.

      Maybe it's not the guns. Maybe it the people and their sub-culture that leads to murder.

      July 27, 2012 at 7:04 pm | Reply
      • pbernasc

        yes of course, that's why such people should not get a gun

        July 27, 2012 at 7:13 pm |
      • Roger

        Maine does in fact require a permit for concealed carry. None required however for open carry.

        July 27, 2012 at 7:39 pm |
      • IM_VT

        Vermont does not require a permit for concealed carry and has low gun crime. More gun related deaths from hunting accidents than homicide I believe.

        July 27, 2012 at 8:31 pm |
      • ManWithThe1000PoundBrain

        The fact that cities with strong gun control laws having high crime does nothing to bolster the case against such laws. The laws are in reaction to a problem that had already existed and guns don't spoil. And do you think it is hard to drive outside of that jurisdiction where the law does not apply and cart guns by the boatload into the city limits? What you are saying actually makes the case for a NATIONAL approach. The U.S. has the most liberal gun control laws (or lack thereof) and also has the most per capita gun violence of any modern democracy. Seems kind of funny to say. Conservatives prefer liberal gun laws and a liberal interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.

        July 27, 2012 at 10:26 pm |
      • Fractual

        Fareed also conveniently neglected to mention that more people die because of Doctors every year than firearms.

        One just has to keep in mind that integrity, be it journalistic or personal, is not even on Fareed's radar.

        July 27, 2012 at 10:36 pm |
      • phil

        yup, the gun loving morons always bring up DC and Chicago crime rates like those are islands. There is something called a car that people use to get to chicago and DC, and those people are the ones that commit the crimes. If there was legislation across the US, watch the gun death rates in those 2 cities decline.

        July 27, 2012 at 10:39 pm |
      • UallRwrong

        And Phil calls people 'Gun loving m0r0ns'. No wonder he hates guns. I bet with his instigating, 'Shovel ready', 8ull$#!t that comes out of his mouth, he probably gets threats all of the time. Just remember Phil. You don't need guns, because people like you are too stupid to handle them properly.

        July 27, 2012 at 11:08 pm |
      • Michael (from Toronto)

        And conveniently no one on the left talks about the violence in movies, video games etc. that absolutely motivates some of these killers to conduct their assaults. How about putting a new age restriction on any movie that contains any gun violence, gratuitous blood, killing of any kind. Restrict it to 21 and older OR take it out of movies entirely. Sorkin recently said in a CNN interview that creating programming or movies with gay couples and continually exposing America to it would help get Americans used to and accepting of this social issue. Hollywood knows that what it does influences viewers perspectives. So how can they not know that violent movies likely result in individuals doing violent things. They do.

        July 28, 2012 at 12:22 am |
      • virginian76

        they don't even sell guns in Chicago or DC, meaning no gun stores...hello!

        July 28, 2012 at 1:02 am |
      • Dennis

        Phil and 1000pound man seem to think that gun laws are the solution and that lack of laws ELSEWHERE is the problem in cities that have these laws. Well think about it. If you have a gun, where are you going to use it to commit a crime? In a location that allows the victim to have a gun, or in Chicago and DC where they victim won't have a gun? It would be a really bad idea to try to invade my house, which has a gun. In fact I am sitting about 24 inches from one right now.

        July 28, 2012 at 1:08 am |
      • Matt

        Maybe it is that one can just drive to another state to get it. In other countries, gun control is entirely federal. What if there were checkstops between states with searches? I think the rate would go down.

        July 28, 2012 at 2:29 am |
      • John Havens

        Fractual, your comment regarding doctors killing more people per year than guns is a fairly bad way to make a point. Perhaps Doctors kill more patients than guns, but the patients are already a higher risk factor because they are visiting a doctor in the first place. People sitting in a movie theatre are not high risk people that should be concerned about being shot.
        Perhaps everyone should be more concerned with the integrity of the argument and offer a real debate, than to question another person's integrity all together.

        July 28, 2012 at 6:34 am |
      • yuri pelham

        NRA doesn't allow meaningful discussion. They rule America. Grover Norquist runs the economy. The best the American people could come up with to counter Obama confirms that these people (Americans) have metamorphed into sheep.

        July 28, 2012 at 6:50 am |
      • j. von hettlingen

        Under Gaddafi's rule, it was forbidden for ordinary Libyans to own guns. People had no way to air run amok and air their anger, frustration and hatred. Once his regime collapsed, came anarchy and guns all of a sudden became tools of communication.

        July 28, 2012 at 7:58 am |
      • tom

        Thanks Eric for your comments. Your point proves two things:

        1. Enacting gun control does not stop violence or those cities with the strongest gun control would have immediately seen the violence go down.

        2. Ability to get a gun does not cause more violence as Eric's examples show

        We need to understand the reasons why people become so angry or desperate that they turn to violence as an outlet. More gun control will be like if you go to the doctor with an infection causing fever and instead of fighting the infection with antibiotics (addressing the cause), the doctor gives you something to reduce the fever (addressing the symptom).
        Those of you who want to ban guns are well meaning and I respect you, but your energies are focused in the wrong area to reach the goal you seek.

        July 28, 2012 at 8:01 am |
      • Lainie11

        This is so true. Also Fareed, what would you do about the 10 gallons of gasoline and 30 grenades that the shooter in Colorado was able to get. Nobody seems to mention this aspect.

        July 28, 2012 at 11:15 am |
      • TahoeBlu

        You will never have real gun control until you have a consistent federal implementation and not sporadic states tightening up their laws. If you can buy the gun in a state 5 miles away and then drive across the state line to DC then it's a waste of time. Have you seen the weapon inventory from both the CO and the MD Joker incidents? It's frickin ridiculous.

        And I own guns.

        July 28, 2012 at 12:09 pm |
      • Fractual

        John Havens, clearly sitting in a movie theater unarmed, being in a place where the ability to defend oneself from deadly attack LEGALLY is removed, is a high risk behavior. Very high risk.

        Wouldn't you say? Or did you miss that event at the theater in Colorado?

        July 28, 2012 at 1:51 pm |
      • Jacob Jackson

        But notice the population densities involved: The state of Maine and the city of Washington or Chicago. Very different environments.

        Sometimes I think the entire gun control question is really a city vrs rural area debate.

        July 28, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
      • Mike

        Maine also has virtually no people...

        July 28, 2012 at 5:12 pm |
      • Leif

        Citiy ordinances have little value when they are surrounded by states and a nation that make it easy for crazies to own guns.

        July 29, 2012 at 3:20 am |
      • Jasonb

        John Havens –
        Grover Norquist runs the economy? Really? That's funny because I thought George Soros was pulling all the puppet strings behind the curtain these days, along with the unions and all the corrupt Chicago politicians in the spirit of Daley and Capone.

        July 29, 2012 at 7:38 am |
      • Sierra117

        I'm Mainer a going for my CCW permit next month, so naturally I'm surprised to hear I don't need one after all.

        July 29, 2012 at 8:18 am |
      • Frank

        What else would you expect from a man named "FAREED" Probably another one of Barrack Hussein Obama's Muslim brotherhood soldiers working on Civilization Jihad to to not only bankrupt America but to DISARM US and make way for the Muslims to WALK RIGHT IN UNABATED! Obama already put in a REVOLVING DOOR FOR the terrorist group.

        Nice try.

        July 29, 2012 at 8:33 am |
      • Gunless in Canada

        Only in America will this debate rage ,less than 2 weeks since the travesty in Aurora.Your economy is in shambles,world opinion is scathing and all you want to do is keep your guns????I don't get it

        July 29, 2012 at 8:52 am |
      • Ben

        yes dc and chicago have the most gun violence. lots of important people (i.e. the president) live in dc, so more crazy people with guns are driven there. they think that they could potentially get in the news by killingnsomeone important, so they go to major cities. if there were more gun laws on a national level, then dc andchicagos gun violence rates would go down.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:49 am |
      • uddie smid

        Yes, the biggest bans don't translate in the least crime; look at Mexico, they got tough gun laws and the crimes are the highest and worst; while in other countries like Sweden and Switzerland crimes like these are practically unheard of. So before anyone touch this issue, let's look at what can really make a change.

        July 29, 2012 at 10:52 am |
      • Bob

        You are SPOT ON ! ! !
        Also consider Kennesaw, GA which REQUIRES all homes in the city limits to own a fire arm – and Kennesaw has one of the VERY LOWEST crime rates in America.
        Conincidence? I think not.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:34 pm |
      • larry

        Spot on!

        July 29, 2012 at 2:08 pm |
      • CBC

        Fractual: Name one incident where a doctor went into a crowded theater and killed a dozen people and injured 58 more in a matter of minutes, and I'll concede your point. Until you do, you have no room to question anyone's integrity, journalistic or otherwise.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:25 pm |
      • cleareye1

        Serious restrictions on the sale of ammo could help a lot along with jail time for possessing an automatic weapon, hand grenades, land mines, rpgs, etc.
        All societies have a weakling class that is frightened of everyone else and tries to compensate for their inadequacy. The NRA specializes in marketing gun products to those people, and very successfully. The entire gun culture is a creation of the manufacturers, the NRA is only the mouthpiece. If you want to have some proof, just look into how much the executive staff at the NRA ia paid. If you can.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
      • ewobi

        Anyone that thinks there is a quick fix to gun violence by controlling the legal purchase of a firearm is ignoring the fact that gun crimes in areas with tight gun controls the violence is mostly done with illegally purchased weapons and ammunition. We are always looking for a quick fix to a problem and are rarely concerned with effectiveness as long as we can grandstand.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
      • DivideByZero

        It's a skewed statistic anyway. The data presented is only for gun homicides measured against the rest of the world. How about measuring all homicides against gun homicides.... I think you'll find a much different number.

        "The U.S has three gun homicides per 100,000 people. That’s four times as many as Switzerland, ten times as many as India, 20 times as many as Australia and England."

        July 29, 2012 at 2:48 pm |
      • Stephen

        Zakaria also says "Meanwhile, serious but non-fatal gun injuries caused during assault have actually increased in the last decade by 20 percent" – how many of those are the criminal who started the assault (with or without a firearm), vice the intended victim who fought back?

        July 29, 2012 at 3:07 pm |
      • Agnar150

        Fareed can go back to where he came from. I bet life is better over there.

        July 29, 2012 at 3:25 pm |
      • Bill

        The article was talking about "gun" related murder.

        August 2, 2012 at 9:55 am |
    • pbernasc

      actually that's the only thing that will get the other man killed, unless he is a trainer law enforcement professional

      July 27, 2012 at 7:12 pm | Reply
      • siteyoursource

        ccw permit have stronger background checks than most police depts. ,and many times have more training with a gun. Not in how to right a ticket. we're just talking guns

        July 29, 2012 at 11:57 am |
      • carson


        That is not true. I agree that the background checks are extensive but traing with the firearm you are going to carry is not required in many states. I live in Washington state and all that is need =ed to aquire a CCW here is 60 dollars and a clean record. I do think that anyone that is going to carry a weapon should be tested in their proficiancy before being aloud to carry it in public. I have to qualify annually to keep my armed security lisc.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:37 pm |
    • flip

      So ok good old Al came up with a catchy saying, so its all right to walk around packing heat. Just the other day there was another SYG shooting here in the Plantation State. Only this guy shot someone packing lobsters; and not content to wound him, shot him in the head while he was down. The first thing he said: I felt treatened. This is totally outrageous, Al comes up with a catchy saying, and a lobster sales person is dead.
      Somehow, Als catchy saying does not make me feel too safe.

      July 27, 2012 at 7:41 pm | Reply
      • Lazy Ace

        If the lobster packer been carrying as well, the result might have been different.

        Remember the old saying, "Fight fire with fire".

        Think of this scenario:

        Let's say that five people in that theater had been carrying that night ,and the shooter knew it .

        He had body armor, but that gas mask won't protect him from bullets.

        Do you think that he would have done what he did?

        If you know that lead is going to come back to you, it changes the whole picture.

        Look at the people that tried to rob the cyber cafe.

        They were brave tough dudes untill the senior citizen's bullets started coming their way.

        July 27, 2012 at 10:55 pm |
      • TahoeBlu

        @lazyace. Your assuming that the CO nut job gave a sh@& that anyone 'might' be packing. HE'S A WACKJOB! Don't apply rational thought to irrational people.

        July 28, 2012 at 12:12 pm |
      • dean-o

        That's what he gets for bringing a lobster to a gun fight...?

        July 29, 2012 at 3:48 pm |
    • Chillkootz

      First I want to post a response to the article itself. A psyhopath will figure a way to use ANY means nesscesary to achieve his or her intended goal. If there were NO guns at all on this planet, he still will achieve his or her goal. And if that goal is killing as many innocent people as they can, They WILL.
      Second, I respect Fareed, and think that he is a very smart person. BUT, we are not living in a Utopia feel good world. This world now is quickly becoming a dog eat dog world. Or country eat country world. You must, as a country, and an individual be able to defend yourself, your family and loved ones, and friends from whatever and whenever that comes down the pike so to speak. We as a country are very close to stepping over the edge internally, and externally. If, and probably when this happens there will be alot of hungry people running the streets. Protect yourself.

      July 27, 2012 at 9:14 pm | Reply
      • diles3

        How is this world becoming more dog eat dog? How is this country becoming more dog eat dog? Crime is down dramatically, including violent crime. International war is not a terribly common phenomenon. There is a great deal o internal conflict, but there is no evidence that this is now more common than it was, say, at the fall of the Soviet Union or at the end of WWI.

        July 27, 2012 at 9:57 pm |
      • Lazy Ace

        Couldn't have said it better myself!!

        July 27, 2012 at 10:58 pm |
      • mahmoud el-darwish

        I agree. Read my post.

        July 27, 2012 at 11:52 pm |
      • Martin

        The facts prove you wrong. If you were right, there would be proportionally just as many mass killings in countries with strict gun control. There simply are not. Nowhere near. You are dead wrong on this.

        July 28, 2012 at 8:33 am |
      • tom


        First I want to post a response to the article itself. A psyhopath will figure a way to use ANY means nesscesary to achieve his or her intended goal. If there were NO guns at all on this planet, he still will achieve his or her goal. And if that goal is killing as many innocent people as they can, They WILL."

        Please take 5 minutes, all of you who think banning guns will stop violence, to google violence in Scotland. Merry old Scotland took the steps you recommend and because of the small population, they achieved it. But Scotland still has a big problem with violence...using what?....surprise, KNIVES. Knife kiiling is a huge problem. My point here is to show that violence is not occurring BECAUSE guns are accessible. Rather, the gun is a tool that the violent person chooses WHEN AVAILABLE because its the most efficient. Let's address the causes of violent behavior and there will be no need to ban anything.

        July 28, 2012 at 11:13 am |
      • TahoeBlu

        @Tom. Yeah, Scottland is being overrun with knife welding mass murderers bumping off people by the dozens..... God help them.

        July 28, 2012 at 12:16 pm |
      • tongsyabass

        @tahoeblue – I am assuming you are being sarcastic and have never actually been to Glasgow, come down to the barras on a weekend and bring a spare pair of kecks

        July 28, 2012 at 5:06 pm |
      • Chris

        @martin Potential correlation does not equal causality.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:20 am |
      • Mrs. Liberty

        Chillkootz- We are "becoming" a dog eat dog world? Have you read history? We've always been a violent species. Remember the Wild West? Slaughtering Native Americans? Civil War? Need I go on? Humans are violent.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:37 pm |
      • MollyBee

        Spoken as if you took it from the NRA Handbook.

        July 29, 2012 at 3:57 pm |
    • UallRwrong

      You got dat right!!!!!! Even though we won again, they will continue their quest for a leftist Amerika. I have a clue for them all. We won based on the fact 'If it looks like $#!t and smells like $#!t, then it must be $#!t....

      July 27, 2012 at 11:02 pm | Reply
      • rdeleys

        It's dumb redneck hicks like you who are the real threat to this country.

        July 28, 2012 at 12:40 am |
      • UallRwrong

        And its people like you who bring out the psychos. Who would be stupid enough to say they are against guns, but in the same breath instigate with name calling? Thats about as stupid as saying they are for gay marriage, but yet they will use the gay lifestyle as an attack tactic towards others in a way that is most offensive to everyone. No wonder they are against guns. The way they talk to people they should be against them, since they are always ready to fire the first shot with their big mouth...

        July 28, 2012 at 1:41 am |
    • UallRwrong

      We bought some time, but don't be fooled. Just like we were surprised by health care and F&F, this POTUS will keep on pushing his leftist agenda. I had legal guns, but they all disappeared. I sent them away to their 'Happy place'. I'd get a plan in order. The second amendment was designed to evolve along with the people for whom it was intended to protect. Governments don't use muskets anymore and neither do we. If it was put into place for citizens to use inferior weapons, then it would be pointless for the amendment all together now wouldn't it? They are legal right now. Put a few up for safe keeping along with a good chunk of ammo while they are still legal.....Just in case

      July 28, 2012 at 1:06 am | Reply
      • eqgold

        Really sad to see so many heavily armed paranoid nuts. There is professional help you know. Might want to get some before you shoot up a 7-11 or something.

        July 28, 2012 at 2:14 am |
      • pjobrien

        I love how the anti-President "patriots" have been talking about Obama taking away their guns since the day he became president, when the reality for the last 4 years has been all hype and not one new anti-gun law. In fact, since Obama has been in office, we now have guns in national parks and in more bars! I wonder what Jesus would do...he didn't even carry a big stick! Isn't he supposed to be your ideal? Or are you going to amend Christianity to fit your lifestyle too?

        July 28, 2012 at 8:49 am |
      • Jamie

        Oh please! pjobrien, you idiot. You can't argue about Christianity and ignore the whole basis for the religion. Jesus didn't NEED a gun, a sword, or a big stick because he was JESUS. Some of his disciples carried swords or protection, though I'm sure they didn't need them either in that situation.

        July 28, 2012 at 11:37 am |
      • Chris

        Yeah paranoid...right. Huge militarized governments NEVER turn on their own people...just look at history!! Every time a nation spends a huge percentage of GDP on illegal wars and puts bankers and military industrialist in charge freedom reigns and everyone gets free health care and a pony!! C'mon you know that congress and the president are hard at work preserving our personal liberty's everyday!!! Heck look at the NDAA!! Now Obama gets to come to your house and grab you without a warrant or a judge and detain you indefinitely because you look funny!! People that look funny are usually terrorists anyway... Thats why the TSA sticks their fingers in your butt on the way to Grandma's for Christmas dinner!! It's all for your safety!!! You are sooo paranoid!!!

        July 28, 2012 at 11:41 am |
      • TahoeBlu

        @Jamie. Oh don't get us started on Christianity. The big C has killed more people in 'the name of religion' then any other organization or cause in the world. Is there anyone in the NRA who isn't Christian? I think it's a conspiracy. Yeah, thats it. A conspiracy. News flash....... NRA secretly run by the Vatican directly out of Rome....

        July 28, 2012 at 12:22 pm |
      • siteyoursource

        EQGOLD If you give your grandmother a cellphone incase her car breaks down, does that make you paranoid? bad people do bad things. Are you prepared to stand there and let them kill you and your family. Your other choice is to be prepared! Will a man... a father watch his family die, or protect them. 90 seconds in aurora was to late, and the theater required all law abideing people to be unarmed. did james holmes not see the NO GUNS sign? Or did he and say "perfect!".

        July 29, 2012 at 12:10 pm |
      • PatMcCarthy

        PJObrien President Obama has stripped us of our 4,5, and 6th Amendments when he signed the NDAA. He stripped us of our first Amendment when he signed an EO that states you can't protest anywhere the secret service is in charge of the security. He's stripped the States' 10th Amendment rights with Obamacare. He's not going to strip us of our 2nd Amendment. The UN and senate will with another SATT. All of this over-regulation of America will be it's downfall. It's sad when you can't have a garden in your yard because it violates "city code", or your little girl can't sell lemonade because "there's no way of telling who made it or where it came from." We need the exact same firepower as the government to keep them in check because, in case you forgot, the people are in charge and NOT the government. "If the government fears the people, you have liberty. If the people fear the government, you have tyranny."

        July 30, 2012 at 12:39 am |
      • The Devil's Duo

        PatMcCarthy – Since you are unable to do your ow research, I have done for you. You should not join in conversations that are beyond your intellectual ability.
        Amendment IV – Search and arrest
        The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
        Amendment V – Rights in criminal cases
        No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
        Amendment VI – Right to a fair trial
        In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.

        July 30, 2012 at 7:30 am |
    • Linda Handy

      I "think" this guy is ANOTHER patsy; doped up, and controlled/handled. L. Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, Columbine, McVay – doped up, brainwashed patsies who were "mind controlled" to do these atrocities. The GOAL is to take our guns away & we will be helpless. Think on this a bit.
      Your comment was excellent.

      July 28, 2012 at 9:29 am | Reply
      • kyheadhunter

        I know that this a worn out phase but " guns, knives, cars, baseball bats, chains, and what ever else may be used to kill humans does not kill humans but humans kill humans. Most of the gun violence takes place in the cities like Chicago, New York, Washington DC, and sad to say Denver, CO which already has strong gun control laws. Its plain to see they don't work. We need stronger criminal laws, longer and harsher prison terms, and start treating criminals like criminals.

        July 29, 2012 at 8:36 am |
    • Alex

      Seems to me that the critical problem is not guns, but Americans. If you got rid of them, you would be saving the world from a mountain of gun-related violence.

      July 28, 2012 at 10:01 am | Reply
      • nina

        Evil is simply a lack of empathy for others. Sometimes mixed with a fear of others (which motivates you to control them). Sometimes mixed with jealousy and leads to hatred. Often it is well blended with a belief in ones own self importance.

        July 28, 2012 at 11:54 am |
    • Terik Ororke

      Right on ! The author has it all wrong–who cares what the rest of the world thinks about our gun ownership-take a good look at Syria-imagine if the rebels did not have guns....the idea behind one world is to disram and then "own."

      July 28, 2012 at 10:10 am | Reply
      • Mike

        The Syrian people (basically) have the blessing of the most powerful military force in the world. If the US government ever turned on the American people the 2nd Amendment wouldn't come remotely close to saving us. It'd be decimation and a glock in the hands of every man woman and child wouldn't stop it.

        The 2nd amendment is long outdated. The military might of the government has long since outpaced that of civilians and thus the value of the second amendment has decreased to the point of irrelevance. It's just a crutch the gun supporters use in the absence of any other non-fear based justification.

        July 28, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
      • Errick

        Hey, Mike, like the US military did such a great job in Iraq and Afghanistan? Or how about the great job the US did in Vietnam? Did you see the map to see which country has the most guns per capita? Oh, that would be the US which also has a much bigger population than Iraq, Afghanistan, or Vietnam. If the US military turned against the American people, there would be a lot of dead soldiers and a lot of dead politicians. There are too many handguns in private hands in the US. All it takes is one person with a handgun to walk up and kill one soldier. Even if he dies, there is one less soldier and the soldiers are less than one percent of the population. Give me 3 million Americans willing to kill and die to get rid of a military dictatorship in the US and I'll give you a dead military and a dead dictator. It is simply a numbers game. No one would fight the US military on it's terms which is Clausewitz style decisive battle on an open field. Instead the strategy of choice would be Sun Tzu/Fabian guerrilla warfare (terrorism is a form of guerrilla warfare) with improvised explosives made from household chemicals, snipers, and assassinations. In other words, a battle for which the US military is not structured to win. One which would take a massive occupying army that the US does not have. In fact it would actually take a smaller resistance movement than the US has troops to defeat the US military in battle through irregular warfare on American soil. Hopefully we will never have to experience such a scenario in the US.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:54 pm |
    • Bo

      I love how one guy goes off topic about automatic weapons and every response after rips on the author about it. Zakaria said "asault weapons", not automatic weapons. So half the argument made previously by posters was pointless. Regardless, the numbers don't lie. More guns per capita, higher rate of deaths. What's your excuse for that?

      July 28, 2012 at 10:33 am | Reply
      • Phil

        "... as guns laws have gotten looser and getting automatic weapons has become easier."

        Actually read the article before you open your mouth.

        July 28, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
      • Archie Bunker

        Norway has rather stringent gun laws compared to the US and many other countries. How did that stop the attack in July, 2011 that killed 69 people?

        July 28, 2012 at 4:00 pm |
      • Huntingonly

        Wake up you stupid 2nd amendment supporters. Newsflash: our government has computerized drones that can fly over your house and take you out in a second. Armed citizens or militias do not stand a chance. Stop using that outdated excuse to keep our country armed and dangerous!

        July 29, 2012 at 9:53 am |
      • Harlon Katz

        Do you know the difference between a "hunting" rifle and an "assault" rifle – the COLOR and material of the stock. A hunting rifle has a wooden stock while the assault rifle has a black, composite stock. People like you and Zakaria through around the term like you actually understand what it means.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:48 am |
      • Andrew

        Well, what do you expect, most gun owners are moron.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
      • Auintr

        @Archie Bunker

        It didn't, but it was an isolated and extraordinary incident, which tells you nothing about the actual Norwegian statistics. The facts show that the Norwegian per capita gun density is very high, and death by firearms very low.

        Furthermore, the strict regulations on firearm ownership, especially regarding semi-automatic pistols and rifles, meant that ABB first had to have a clean criminal record, he had to be an active member of a shooting club, and there was a long latency period. He had planned his actions for a long period and was thus able to aquire the firearms legally.

        July 29, 2012 at 8:28 pm |
    • Lance Stoff

      These same incidents DO happen around the world. These acts of violence are not unique to the United States.
      What is unique to the United States is the amount of National and International attention that are given to these acts by our our 3 ring circus masters: the Media. While these acts are horrible and do need to be reported on, our media tends to sensaltionalize these things in a manner that is as over the top as a Rogers & Hammerstein musical.
      Our Media is like a teenager full of angst shouting for attention "Hey look at me".
      It is the MEDIA that make this a political issue by giving these incidents so much "over the top" attention.

      A dozen people were killed in Colorado. yes it is a horrible thing.
      How many people were killed all over the world that day?
      How many soldiers were killed and injured?
      How many were killed or injured with something other than a firearm?

      Let's suppose the perpetrator didn't have a gun.
      As determined as he was to commit this act of violence, he would have found another, possibly even more deadly way to commit this heinous crime.
      Think about it.
      Suppose he had:
      Walked into the theater, lit a flare and used it to light several pipe bombs he had made and had thrown them into the crowd.
      Chained the doors to that theater shut and started it on fire with some sort of accelerant.
      Drove a vehicle into the building.
      Remember Timothy McVei? or the guy that flew his plane into the IRS building?
      Are we going to have tougher pipe buying laws? gasoline buying laws? car buying laws? Truck Rental laws?

      Just think for a moment, what the outcome MAY have been, if there had been armed, trained civilians in the theater that night.
      Perhaps the body count would have been less and perhaps the perpetrator would have been amongst them. But alas the theater was filled with a bunch of neutered people, who have had it beaten into them that defending yourself is bad.

      Texas has the right idea. if everyone has a gun, it's kind of like Nuclear Deterant: You have a gun? so do I, now what?

      Our politicians could not care less about the people killed and injured.
      To the politicians they are a nameless, faceless "thing" to be exploited, to rally some segment of voters to their camp so they can gain what they desire: poloitical power.

      I was taught to stand up to bullies. If you stand up to a bully, you might get beat up, but if you don't stand up to them, you DEFINETLY will get beat up.
      (I believe this applies to politics as well, politicians are just bullies armed with money instead of guns)

      It bothers me that the ones pounding the pulpit saying it would be safer if noone had guns, are people who live in a completely different world from the majority of the population, and are a lot less likely to be a victim of this type of violence.
      To them it's ok that the average citizen doesn't have a gun to defend themselves.
      They sit back with security, fences, gates, armed guards to defend them.
      I bet when they call 911 the cops show up to their house a lot faster than they do to mine.
      Does that guy in the White House go to movies at a Cineplex? how about any of the other candidates, in fact, how about any of the influential people who want gun control? No, I'm sure the majority go to prvate screenings & gala event premiers.
      They have as much chance of being the victim of a home invasion as I have of walking on the moon tomorrow.

      So lets say it comes to pass, gun regulation up the wahzoo.
      Only 1 out of 100 homes has a gun.
      Has that stopped people from illegally obtaining guns? probably not.
      What it has done is to give criminals a much larger flock of sheep to prey upon.
      Would you be more or less likely to attack someone if they were a very high probability that they were armed too?

      A change in gun laws? you bet. start teaching our children gun safety in school at an early age. Train them to be proficient in their use. teach them firearm responsibility. Maybe, just maybe, we would go from being a nation of unarmed potential victims, to a nation of armed potential heroes.

      Taking guns away from law abiding citizens so that criminals won't be able to get ahold of them, is like saying we should take away cars from everyone so a thief can't steal it and use it to commit another crime.

      July 28, 2012 at 11:02 am | Reply
      • Jennifer W

        Best comment on this whole page...period. And Texas does have it right!!

        July 28, 2012 at 1:26 pm |
      • Jacob Jackson

        But the call is for more regulations to prevent arming people. Those regulations could include restrictions on gunpowder, which would make it harder to create the imagined bomb. Just a simple battery of tests might also be effective, along the lines of the tests for a driver's license. This would requirement would also mean that the applicant would have to come face to pace with police officers to take the exam, which might discourage someone planning to commit a crime.

        Would such a license prevent every murder or mass murder? No, of course not. But it might reduce the number of homicides and hunting accidents each year.

        July 28, 2012 at 3:45 pm |
      • Larry

        Lance, great response and I have to agree 100%. To the poster mentioning controlling gunpowder to make it harder to make a pipe bomb – Tim McVey's bomb didn't even use gunpowder – diesel and amonium nitrate fertilizer – so now we gonna limit those too? Tackle the problem, not the results – get the violance off TV, XBox, GameBoy – where do you think all these nutcases learned the violance?

        July 28, 2012 at 7:29 pm |
      • kbwizard

        Thank you for saving mt the trouble of writing a post. Well said..

        July 29, 2012 at 8:35 am |
      • kyheadhunter

        I agree with you 110% my friend.

        July 29, 2012 at 8:50 am |
      • kiri@comcast.net

        That question is kind of scary. Only people intending to attack anyone would actually consider answering the question.

        People considering attacking others do not care if they are packing or not. They are already irrational. And we allow them guns. Not so good a combination.

        Facts are facts. The more guns that saturate a population, the higher the death rate from those guns.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:38 am |
      • Harlon Katz

        Look at Mexico – few legal guns, yet for some reason, the criminals get them (thanks to people like the Obama adminstration), and you are telling me THEY are safer there? What about Brazil or some of the African countries.

        It is not the guns, it is the people and what they choose to do with them. We have MUCH stricter gun control laws here in IL and in Chicago, but more people are killed over a weekend day than in CO. How is it that criminals can get guns?

        July 29, 2012 at 11:53 am |
      • L. Ottoson

        BRAVO!!! I believe in teaching youngsters gun safety and hunting. I was taught at six and have been loving the outdoors ever since. I'm, 74 and still hunting every season. I'm a grandmother and my grandchildren are learning hunting as well.
        You might tell people to check on gun related deaths worldwide. PER CAPITA the U.S. is so low it is not even listed in the top 30! Another trivia FACT, more policemen are killed in car crashs than in gun related incidents!
        If anybody tried to take my guns from me, they'd better bring a tank!
        Keep up the good work.

        July 29, 2012 at 12:56 pm |
      • JC in Western U.S.

        Lance, your car analogy would go further with a lot of people if every gun was registered, annually inspected, property taxed, identified with a VIN as well as by numbers visible to others, used by owners who had graduated licenses, and "fueled" with a limited choice of ammunitions which were also highly regulated and taxed, and available only at places with video cameras recording each buyer and their means of payment which, if it was a check, credit, or debit card would be traceable. I mean if you want to compare cars to guns, then go for it! Let's put the same restrictions on guns that we have on cars and then the talk of banning guns will seem as ridiculous as the idea of banning cars.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:14 pm |
      • Dan Mathis

        Right on the money!!

        July 29, 2012 at 5:06 pm |
      • John M3

        Very well said. It is time to focus on the real problem. It is criminals. Let's stop making excuses for people who commit crimes. Lock them up and throw away the key. Expensive but I think much cheaper than expanding the BATF so that they are large enough to search every home and confiscate all the guns in private hands. I can't take seriously the calls for ordinary citizens to forgo guns and rely upon calling 911 for protection from a class of politicians that have 24 hour armed bodyguard protection.
        Those of you that are against guns, I suggest you put up a sign on your lawn, similar to those indicating you have an alarm system, that states "Gun Free Household". Since guns don't protect you and are evil. Let everyone in your neighborhood know you stand up for preventing gun violence by not having any in your home.
        Some of you want to limit my rights as to what guns I can own, how much ammunition, how many guns. Can I in turn regulate what kind of car you can drive, what books you can read. What style of clothes you can wear? The "Politicians" can't be trusted to balance the national budget, yet they are smart enough to know what each of use should be doing? I really don't think that the President and Congress have demonstrated in the smallest amount that they know better than I do how to protect myself and my family.

        July 29, 2012 at 6:12 pm |
      • Auintr

        "if there had been armed, trained civilians in the theater that night."

        Is this your solution? Yours and the crazies applauding it? I am very fortunate to not be an American.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:14 pm |
      • ES

        > Texas has the right idea. if everyone has a gun, it's kind of like Nuclear Deterant: You have a gun? so do I, now what?

        I live in Houston. Every day police shoots somebody because the person made a wrong move and police assumes they have a gun, so they shoot to kill. So far in all the cases the person actually didn't have a gun on them. That is what availability of guns does. It escalates the level of violence.

        July 30, 2012 at 10:16 am |
      • Steve in Colorado

        Romney passed some of the strictest gun control laws ever while governor of Massachussetts, then lied about owning a gun and being a lifetime hunter (he did not own a gun at the time and had been hunting twice in his life).

        Obama enacted a law to allow guns in National Parks, and that's it. He has no intention of pushing for more gun laws.

        NRA for Obama 2012.

        July 30, 2012 at 12:39 pm |
      • Grumpyfin

        The days of NEEDING a gun are over for the average American. If you want to hunt, take your butt to your local grocery store and ensure you're armed with some MONEY and then hunt up and down the isles for your food and pull your wallet trigger at the checkout! Next, stop this lunacy of placing people on trial for crimes we KNOW they committed!!!! This idiot who shot up a movie theater should've been killed by a firing squad already. WHY ARE WE WASTING OUR TAX DOLLARS ON LUNACY?!?!?!?!?!?!

        August 2, 2012 at 10:03 am |
    • Destinyisfree

      I agree! If one of the patrons had a gun and shot him, lives could have been saved. If a person is hell bent on killing he/she will find a way. If guns aren't available, you can get ingredients for a bomb, set a fire, use poison, etc. etc.
      People kill....not guns!

      July 28, 2012 at 11:03 am | Reply
      • Archie Bunker

        The argument there was his body armor. It would have taken a lucky shot to stop him. But, you'd have to try.

        July 28, 2012 at 4:03 pm |
      • RickInNY

        Hey Archie, so shooting him in the face, or below the belt wouldn't have slowed him down? Hitting him in the chest and sending him flying backwards, or knocking him down wouldn't have helped. He had some armor on, big deal. If someone shot him, it would have been a much different story.

        July 29, 2012 at 10:41 am |
      • newcraft

        Enough already with this "he could have been taken out if someone else had a gun" false premise.

        No. He was wearing body armor. And anyone military or who has been trained in a similar scenario will tell you that firing back in that theater would likely have harmed movie goers in the process – deflected bullets, chaos of people running in all directions etc. It wasn't a case where having other people with conceal carry would have stopped people from being hurt.

        Have you not read the reports of the survivors? Many of them were injured by deflections of shell casings, not necessarily from being directly targeted.

        People really need to get over the idea that simply owning a gun is some sort of magical insurance against bad things happening to them. The stastics show that it's false. There aren't so many conceal carry owners who have actually prevented bad crime, and there are more children and people hurt by improperly-stored or misfired weapons every year.

        July 29, 2012 at 10:46 am |
      • Jeff Williams


        Let's focus on the facts. The above statement is NOT a fact. There is no evidence he would have used a bomb or chemical. On the other hand, we ALL know he used guns and was equipped like paramilitary. This is the reality. Let's start there.

        No civilian should be as equipped as paramilitary. No one. Your right to play SEAL TEAM 6 ends where my right to watch a movie in public, gunfire-free, begins. My right to life trumps your right to play soldier. If it's that important to you to wear body armor and use assault rifles for entertainment, properly exercise your 2nd amendment right by joining the National Guard or the Army or Marines.

        You imagine stopping the all-in-black gunman in the chaos with your concealed gun in the dark theater. You – with your screen-illuminated body dressed in cotton shirt and Dockers slacks – your handgun, and a critically-necessary headshot versus an intent killer in full body armor equipped with a military weapon and practically unlimited ammo. THIS is irrational thinking.

        July 29, 2012 at 3:33 pm |
      • DeanNandana

        Re the body armor, it does not make you bulletproof even if you've got chest and back plates. It keeps a round from killing you. You still get to deal with blunt force trauma, it will probably knock you down, and it will likely really, really hurt.

        I own body armor. A friend asked me if I would, for one million dollars, take one .223 round to the chest while wearing it. My response? No.. friggin.. way. (And it ain't because the armor was expensive!)

        If someone had shot the madman in the chest with a 9mm pistol, I wouldn't be at all surprised if said madman would have soon thereafter found himself the proud owner of a very small closet with handles on the side.

        July 30, 2012 at 1:55 pm |
      • Tim

        Newcraft: Nope not wearing body armor. tactical vest, not bullet proof. If they are all CCW holders trained to carry. Holmes would have lasted about 5 seconds before they took him out. Actually only needed 6 CCW holders carrying to achive that. There is a reason that Holmes didn't go to a police station or target range to carry out his dastardly deeds. He needed unarmed victims. I work at a nuclear power plant and all the guards have AR15's & 9M glocks. I feel plenty safe there.

        August 2, 2012 at 4:02 pm |
    • jerrybradbury37

      Absolutely. One or two armed, law abiding citizens, whose training to qualify for a CCW permit includes response to an armed opponent definitely would have engaged and eliminated this nutcase.

      And by the way, Fareed, the Aurora massacre probably would not have happened in Switzerland because of their lenient gun laws and a well armed population. (see this Swiss Girls poster at http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=505955516087757&set=a.269368279746483.86588.269358643080780&type=1&theater)

      Robert A. Heinlein said, "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."

      July 28, 2012 at 11:39 am | Reply
      • Mike

        In the age of internet trolls, extreme partisan divide and easy access to guns let's live in a world where everybody is packing heat and scared to say something inappropriate for the fear of getting shot or getting their family shot.

        You want normal families to act like gangs.

        Think about that.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:01 pm |
    • Yes you right

      Yes I lived in a country where the guns were banned or was very hard to acquire. So mafia was all over the country, until one small businessman can't stand any longer racketeering, and he shout ten mafia people. After that a lot of thing changed, to better. Another example was when someone said that if you feel preassure by someone and he threaten your life, he said you should be report to police or protect your self with the gun (Actually it was press conference of president). And president just laughed and replied. Ya right.

      July 28, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Reply
    • Dave

      Really ? Who in the middle east does not own an AK47

      July 28, 2012 at 1:31 pm | Reply
      • I will buy another gun for fareed

        Syrian population. They must flee and surrender to the rebels. As a result, Israel may attack just to prevent the rebels from obtaining things much worse than an AK.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:27 pm |
    • Jack

      What is pathetic is the fact that we are all tied to weapons as a "family friendly" experience. We love to say it is a "sport". Sure hunting is, but the President had it right. You don't need an AR15 to go hunt duck and elk. Don't touch my gun is similar to peoples argument that they can smoke wherever they feel\, but we can't argue with the facts of second hand smoke, even though the tobacco companies fought that notion for years. Neither can we ignore the facts of statistics of weapons and the numbers of violent deaths compared with other countries. We are such a stupid society sometimes. And speaking of nutjobs. How do you plan to enforce gun laws, when you are sane at the time of purchase, but lose it later in life because of some tragedy or psychotic breakdown and vent your anger on your neighbors and law enforcement, such as the guy in Indiana that shot it out with officers. No law can protect you from that. Sorry, but guns kill and if that is your idea of sport and freedom, then maybe that is one of the many reasons the rest of the world sees us as agressive nuts.

      July 28, 2012 at 1:32 pm | Reply
      • kbwizard

        Today’s bogie man is the AR15. Generally this dubious distinction goes to the ubiquitous AK47. I own a Mini-14 It fires the same round as the AR15 it functions in the same exact manner. I will admit that the recoil is less on the AR15.
        I can say this because I know something about guns. What do you know? Let me guess; they kill people.
        Well, here’s the problem; most people who advocate more gun control have no idea of what they are talking about.
        You can always tell right from the start because they vilify a particular gun. Some time back in PA a man went into a woman heath spa. He had 2 Glocks. I forget how many people he killed. So on TV Then Gov Ed Wendell is talking about how you can’t stop a crazy person by passing laws against peoples lawfull 2 A rights. I was shocked to hear him say that. Then the other shoe dropped and he “ But the Glock, the Glock is a killing machine, a killing machine. (Yes he repeated himself almost in a frenzy) It was the best example I ever saw of a Politian talking out of both sides of his mouth. We can always look to ban the _______ fill in the blank, as more evil then the next. In fact, lets ban guns from the police, if they are bad by nature then they should be in no one’s hands. Crazy? You bet. It’s Just as crazy as you telling me that I cannot defend my life in the gravest extreme. I am a NRA pistol instructor. When I am asked do I (They) a gun. My answer is always the same. Most likely you will never, never, never, need a gun, UNLESS you NEED a gun. If you need a gun and do not have one, there are only 3 possible out comes.
        1 You will escape unharmed. 2. You will be maimed or injured 3. You will be murdered.
        I have never been wrong about this, as the Movie shooting shows. Yes a responsibly armed person should have been in the crowd. Another person armed besides the “ Joker” could have made a big difference. Instead, people can now be found in one of the three categories listed.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:30 am |
      • Harlon Katz

        Hey, maybe we should limit speech to the same extent that liberals want to limit guns. Wait, Liberals want to limit the free speech rights of those they don't agree with as well – nevermind.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:56 am |
    • Jeff

      +1. The Aurora theater had a gun-control policy, and 99% of the patrons complied with it. Lotta good that did. People with homicidal wishes don't need guns - just look at the 9/11 hijackers or any number of suicide bombers. I often like Zakaria's colulmns, but he is way off base with this - there is a reason why the Second Amendment says our right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed."

      It's funny, because we value First Aid and CPR training so citizens can intervene in emergencies before the professionals arrive, but we don't do the same with protection of the populace. I have great admiration for our police officers, but it's no knock on them to observe that when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

      July 28, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Reply
    • spence

      The only way for a madman to kill those with guns, is with a gun.

      July 28, 2012 at 2:12 pm | Reply
      • Craig

        what's it matter if they get killed with a gun or a bomb or poison? They are still dead. Explain to me how criminals follow laws again. All gun control laws will do in a case like Colorado is change the method of death on the police report. A bomb or other mass killing device could be far more effective. Look no further than the middle east to see how nut jobs use bombs to kill dozens.

        July 29, 2012 at 8:25 am |
    • HKIS

      For you and other gun loving folks (and I don't mean that in a negative way), IF it can be shown through data that America would be safer as country if guns laws were strengthened would you be for gun control?

      July 28, 2012 at 4:55 pm | Reply
      • Harlon Katz

        @HKIS – it has been shown that places like Chicago and IL in general are not "safer" as criminals don't obey gun laws either. Funny how those statistics are ignored by gun grabbing folks.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:58 am |
    • Tim Hallbeck

      Words to live by. If you have to look down the barrel of a gun, better to be holding one yourself as well. You may not win, but even a tie is going to work out better for everyone else around you. That's what fighting for freedom means.

      July 28, 2012 at 5:01 pm | Reply
      • John M3

        Absolutely right on!

        July 29, 2012 at 6:20 pm |
    • Fool

      On the map is a light green Somalia, an even lighter green Syria, Koye's mucking up light green countries...the entire premise of guns out of the hands of civilians corresponding to less dead bodies is so obviously untrue that it turns the article from inaccurate to offensive. Then the claim of state gun laws helping the problem-Chicago is the murder capital of the country right now and has stricter gun bans than Washington D.C. or anywhere else in the nation. The entire point of this article is completely bogus.

      July 28, 2012 at 7:24 pm | Reply
    • YourMama

      As long as its an american killing an american its only fun for the rest of the world. Al-Queada and the Talibans are laughing their behinds off at your barbarism.

      July 28, 2012 at 9:17 pm | Reply
    • BowNow

      @dolapoidris, that is very simplistic and dangerous thinking that is only encouraged by people who make make money from selling guns. A smarter way of doing it would be to make it harder for that madman to get his hands on dangerous fire-arms. That is what happens in other countries where fire-arm crimes are far less than in the US.

      July 28, 2012 at 9:23 pm | Reply
    • Fahreed

      We will take all of your guns.

      July 28, 2012 at 10:09 pm | Reply
      • RickInNY

        I would LOVE to see you try it!!

        July 29, 2012 at 10:49 am |
      • jaswanny

        Sir you are so transparent, it makes reading your article difficult and painful. More people have been killed in the name of religion in less time then it takes you to read this. Please re-direct your energy to a cause that you can win or change. Lets face it your not going to take anyone's gun. Neither are the police or the federal government. You obviously know nothing about firearms or the shooting sports. Please stick to your lattes, golf, and dinner parties.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:54 am |
    • caroline

      To blame only the psychological state of the individual who pulled the trigger is to ignore the social context within which this tragedy became a possibility and then a reality. And trust me, I am all for more gun control laws as a measure to protect the public but allow people to continue to have the right to own arms in a responsible way. However, claiming that this should be the focus and not the psychological health of our people is just as misguided. We need to repair the broken state of mental healthcare support in this country. We need to recognize mental health illness as a category of distinct DISEASES that individuals and their families need support for (through proper healthcare services) in order to overcome difficulties their own disease presents them. As a society, we need to begin to recognize the complicated layers which inherently surround social issues and understand that altering one aspect is not the way we can best solve our problems.

      July 28, 2012 at 10:29 pm | Reply
    • Leif

      There would be fewer madmen with guns if you made it harder for them to obtain guns.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:08 am | Reply
      • Chris

        Not really. They'd just find some other way to kill people. Bombs, perhaps. Maybe poison, or a good, old fashioned sword.

        July 29, 2012 at 6:35 pm |
    • Leif

      The 2nd Amendment refers to a regulated militia. What regulated militia did he belong to?

      July 29, 2012 at 3:13 am | Reply
    • Leif

      An education in morality would be less expensive.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:28 am | Reply
      • Reallly?

        Please tell me. Who's morality should we indoctrinate people with? Yours? Since I'm assuming you and your minions are all-knowing and should be so gracious to educate the brainless, toothless masses who believe in standing up for themselves. Believe it or not, there are those out there who are not waiting for big brother to do everything just so we can keep watching Jersey Shore without interruption.
        The amazing thing about this country (The U.S.) is that both sides of this argument can actually live together peacefully as each side chooses. Things begin to get scary, though, when one side (either side) decides their way is the only way and tries to protect the ignorant "dissidents" by removing rights dear to them (2nd amendment or Roe V. Wade) in the name of "common sense".

        Do not force your version of morality on me and I won't force mine on you.

        For those who are so easily swayed by "facts" (which are actually nothing more than skewed statistics), ask Mr. Zakaria how many car related deaths occurred in Zermatt, Switzerland. A town at the foot of the Matterhorn where cars are banned (at least they were in 1996). Maybe if it is lower there than in the U.S., we should adopt their policy, ban cars and take it one step further by relying on government provided universal transportation.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:02 am |
    • Sarah

      How surprising this has turned into a discussion regarding stats on automatic weapons vs. non automatic weapons...the article was about GUNS !!!!!!!!!!!!!! WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!! Are you surprised when these tragedies take place?? What is it every six months in the US now??? As a Canadian, when we hear news of another shooting, another massacre, it is sadly not surprising for us anymore. It's about time someone at CNN has the courage and the brains to bring up gun control. It is astounding that in the past week that the discussion of gun control has not been brought up. Start focusing on the root of the problem GUNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      July 29, 2012 at 4:04 am | Reply
      • nina

        1. I do not believe you are Canadian.
        2. Canadians have the same problem with shootings. The only difference is that there is less Canadians and therefore less shootings.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:24 am |
      • Bobby

        Sara, you are lying through your teeth...How about the 2 dead and 19 injured @ a toronto BBQ less than 10 days ago...oh yea, how about the shooting @ a toronto mall back in early june?

        July 29, 2012 at 10:45 am |
      • RickInNY

        @ Sara – Hahahahahahaha

        Funny. Now get back in line, sheep.

        July 29, 2012 at 10:52 am |
    • Raymond

      I find it silly that people keep blaming guns for all the crimes being committed. A gun like any other inanimate object is a tool. Guns don't commit the crime, people do. A man that is intent on hurting others will always find a way with or without a gun. That person can use other tools to do so.Society nowadays tend to blame everything and everyone else for it's problems and rarely put the blame on the culprit. Our society has lost it's values. We are a society of reality tv, entertainment, sports and distractions. We as a society need to focus on our families, values, education, responsibility and the other traits that made this country great.

      The right to bear arms must have been very important to our founding fathers for them to make it the 2nd Amendment. They recognized the rights of its citizens to be able to defend themselves from all form of threats. People tend to take their rights for granted and does not think that they will be taken from them. Don't easily surrender your rights because once you lose them they may not be easy to regain. Expecting the police to protect you all the time is ridiculous especially when they are under-staffed and under budget. They are trying their best, but it is impossible for them to be everywhere and on time. In their absence, who will you depend on to protect you and your loved ones?

      Blame the culprit and make them accountable.

      July 29, 2012 at 4:09 am | Reply
    • allenwoll

      Stop Alan.

      July 29, 2012 at 4:56 am | Reply
    • warsteiner

      OH YEAH LET LISTEN TO THE ARAB MUSLIM AND DISARM,I dont think so and I would rather have guns then the standard of living in any other country. Out of all the places in the world we have the worst gun violence. Where did these ridiculous notions come from. Lets look at Syria, Congo,Rwanda,Iran,Egypt,etc etc and you want us to believe ITS TIME you have an agenda and not a good one. I wont tell anyone why I like firearms I refuse to dignify the ridiculous questions being thrown around. There was 3 people stabbed yesterday in my town we going to ban knives next. No the forefathers had to fight tyranny for freedom thats why they included it in our Declaration of Independence. Thats good enough for me

      July 29, 2012 at 6:22 am | Reply
    • warsteiner


      July 29, 2012 at 6:32 am | Reply
      • muslim traitor

        W you are most likely a Muslim yourself. I can tell your B S. Your imam would be proud.

        July 29, 2012 at 7:23 am |
      • Be-be

        Amen! The muslims did say they would infiltrate us by any way/means neccesary. I don't trust Fareed. did he grow up here? does he know our history and what we are made of. I grew up in Lexington Mass. so I have a pretty good idea how we gained independence and what made us a great nation. Minutemen need to go back into service

        July 29, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
    • joe

      yes all the countries with fewer guns are also communist and dictatorships..good call AL

      July 29, 2012 at 7:12 am | Reply
    • SteveP

      there's is only 1 thing responsable for what happen in Co and it has nothing to do with gun control or hollywood movies, it has to do with James holmes, he is the only thing responsable for what happen.
      people like you Fareed Zakaria, want's to take something like this and make this political, lets put a ban on cars seeing how they kill thousand a years,

      July 29, 2012 at 8:10 am | Reply
    • Dan

      Why don't you start the premise ....stopping a madman WITHOUT a gun rather than a madman with a gun. That's pretty warp in your thinking.

      July 29, 2012 at 8:18 am | Reply
    • Jason P

      Fareed did a poor job of research and chose to ignore the obvious facts. If someone breaks into my house, I will shoot them with my firearm. Now Fareed's little Atlantic graph attempts to represent that as a bad homicide or preventable death if we just have more gun laws. WRONG WRONG WRONG That's a justified homicide and that is exactly the outcome we want. We wanted law abiding citizens to have the ability to protect themselves and save themselves from becoming victims of the most heinous crimes. Anyone that thinks gun restrictions are great have only Chicago or DC to look to for proof of their failed ideology.

      July 29, 2012 at 8:22 am | Reply
    • Dan

      @dolapoidris...your thinking is quite warped. No wonder we have problems in this country. "To stop a madman with a gun is another man with a gun??" Duh...what about preventing that nut from getting that gun. Hello !!! Definitely warped thinking.

      July 29, 2012 at 8:22 am | Reply
    • Kal

      Who cares what the rest of the world does or has?

      July 29, 2012 at 8:47 am | Reply
    • EdJ

      Interesting statics used in the article, however of the gun related deaths and injuries, you left out a VERY important piece of information; how many of the guns used to commit these acts were legally obtained?

      I know the tragedy in Colorado is the horrible exception to the rule. I am sure you will find that the vast majority of firearms utilized in crimes are illegally obtained by the people who use them.

      However, I also realize it is nearly impossible to get anyone to change their personal views on this issue no matter which side they stand on. But I implore anyone to investigate ALL of the facts before forming an extremely polarized decision. It is possible to have opposing opinions with people and not turn argumentative if you keep the topic fact based and do not take it as a personal attack on yourself or make personal attacks on someone else.

      July 29, 2012 at 8:49 am | Reply
    • dr1776

      The facts or statistics are correct, unfortunately he has misinterpreted them, as he said violent crimes in the USA have gone down at record levels. These numbers coincide with the increase in Americans carrying concealed carry firearms, which in turn makes the bad guys more fearful of there prey. Hence the result, simple cause and effect. The problem with there gun violence statistic is that it counts all gun violence, even when people defend themselves. Theres no exclusion when grandma shoots a thief in the night, it gets counted an added to the gun violence statistic. Why can't people just be honest and argue there points on there own merit. instead of graying the lines and hiding behind falsely interpreted statistics. unbiased journalism is extinct. Dont be a sheep, think for yourself.

      July 29, 2012 at 9:06 am | Reply
    • Mike

      No more comments are being accepted, so it is necessary to post a reply. .... Isn't it fascinating to note that Fareed Zakaria is an Indian-born Muslim whose father is an Islamic scholar. I can well imagine he would like to see America disarmed.

      July 29, 2012 at 9:13 am | Reply
      • scott bleyle

        This bung plug can go back to middle east and spew his POV to Syria

        July 29, 2012 at 10:08 am |
      • Michael

        The ignorance and lack of tolerance has me shaking my head in shame at the idiocy of the "American" replies. First off, the only true "Americans" are the Native Americans. This country was created by people from every country and every walk of life coming to a common land, taking it by force. Are you proud of that?

        The 2nd Ammendment was created at a time when this country was in its infancy and was needed to be "policed" and protected by its citizens, or militia. SInce there was little in the way of a true army, it was necessary for our forefathers to form militias to protect what we wanted in a nation. Times have changed. That is no longer needed. Everyone needs to READ the second ammendment. It has no bearing on the US today. Ammendments were made just for that reason. To be ammended when it needs to be. However, the NRA and the powers of the gun manufacturers prevent that from happening. Money. Gun toting lemmings, with little or no education still think that it is their "god given right" to own as many guns as possible. This ignorance is evident to the rest of the world, just not to some of the narrow minded citizens of the US.

        Mike, you need to read more. You need to understand other people, in other countries. India has the second largest population. The people of that country have never started a war. They have defended their country a few times from invaders, most recently from Pakistan. India is a melting pot of different religions. While thay have had their share of uprisings between those religions, usually started by zealots and fundamentalists from both sides, they live in tolerance of one another. Zakaria is an Indian, who happens to come from a family who practices Islam. So what. If you call yourself a "christian", then should everyone use that against you, since millions have been killed in the name of that religion over the past 2000 years?

        July 29, 2012 at 11:24 am |
    • Jstic

      Yeah, right. How did that work out in Colorado, or W. Virginia, or for that matter, any of the mass shootings that have plagued this country in the past 20 years?

      July 29, 2012 at 9:24 am | Reply
      • Harlon Katz

        How does gun control work in Chicago?

        Suck on those statistics.

        July 29, 2012 at 12:01 pm |
      • ask23000

        @Harlon Katz
        Actually, most of the guns used to commit crimes in Chicago and other big cities with gun control come from OUT OF STATE. For example, New York State has estimated that as much as 90% of the guns in criminal acts in New York City come from states WITHOUT gun control and are smuggled into the city. So suck on that!

        July 29, 2012 at 2:24 pm |
      • Harlon Katz

        @ask3000 – you must not be too bright, because you just proved the point – CRIMINALS will get guns no matter what. CRIMINALS do not obey laws, what makes brain children like you believe they will obey gun control laws. They tried it, it did not work.

        July 29, 2012 at 10:19 pm |
    • MichaelChatt

      Well, if it helps you sleep better at night think of it this way. American gun owners sit as a detterent to all the many enimies our country makes as it bullies the world with psychopathic tendancies. We put people in office who are unqualified to manage a stop and go and we wonder why things go crazy. I do not refer to the president specificly. This is what America is most known for, not our guns.

      Fact, violent crime in America is going down, not up.

      Fact Britain has higher per capita crime rates than the US in almost every other catagory, one might say because they have no weapons to defend themselves.

      Inner City Violence and gang wars account for very large portions of our crimes. It seems unlikely they will go down even if they had no weapons.

      July 29, 2012 at 9:25 am | Reply
      • ask23000

        Crime in general is going down - but NOT gun violence. Gun violence is no less today than it was last year or the year before. You clearly didn't read the article. I might add that these statistics are not touted by Fareed alone. You can find them cited all over the place - by liberals, centrists and conservatives.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
    • Dr Dr..

      So you think is right to sell a gun to a person that is mentally ill,, good going genious...

      July 29, 2012 at 9:27 am | Reply
    • Slik77

      2 wrongs don't make a right. Live by the gun die by the gun...

      July 29, 2012 at 9:32 am | Reply
    • Rick

      I have shot over a million rounds and have yet to kill a human being. Having access to personal firearms is the last defense against criminals – and tyranny. It is this kind of thinking (gun control) that will eventually lead to a populace that are sheep and fodder for our leaders. Instead of the number of gun deaths – how about the number of rounds shot vs persons harmed? THAT would be a better statistic. Keep in mind – we are also the FREEST nation on Earth. Take away the firearms – we step down the path of totalitarianism. These tragedies MUST be stopped....but NOT at the price of the 2nd amendment.

      July 29, 2012 at 9:38 am | Reply
      • scott bleyle

        Yassar Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize after being head of P.L.O;when asked for a quote he said "Always put your faith in a revolver."

        July 29, 2012 at 10:15 am |
    • racercoup@yahoo.com

      I live in Boston, nearly every gun death here happens within a 3 mile radius. Most are drug related and 75% of the fatalies have a prison record.

      And you say this is not sociological?

      July 29, 2012 at 9:47 am | Reply
    • TJeff

      No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. 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, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

      July 29, 2012 at 9:50 am | Reply
    • Emil Banks

      I agree with you, more people are killed by drunk drivers and there are laws about driving perhaps we need to restrict the number of drivers in the world or do away with cars and go back to horses but then lots of people were also killed by horses.
      How many people have been killed foolishly over religion

      July 29, 2012 at 9:56 am | Reply
      • Daniel Keating

        Exactly Emil...we tried banning alcohol–this gave birth to gangs & organized crime and we realized then that "prohibitions don't work". So what did they do? make alcohol legal but with tight controls (liquor licensing, age restrictions, public intoxication & drunk driving laws). We have thousands of drunk driving & alcohol related illness deaths (liver diseases, alcoholism etc). Is there talk of bringing back prohibition? NO.
        People are just now beginning to grasp that in regards to the 'war on drugs" –people to the right of the spectrum simply have to realize that the drug war fuels violence from profit motivation and their insistance to being "tough on drugs" means that another group wants to get "tough on guns". One cannot pick & choose prohibitions that don't work based on their political leanings. The left leaning folks will have to realize that guns are not going away as any attempt at a prohibition will create a black market–along with that will come cheap sheet metal machine guns that really ARE fully automatic with NO safeties etc.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:35 pm |
    • smash

      Look at the statistics of murder rates in Chicago from 2001 to 2012. Over 5,000 people have been murdered by gun violence. Look at the same troop deaths in Afghanistan (WAR ZONE) over the same period over 2,000 deaths. Chicago has strict gun laws just like New York and Washing D.C. So can someone please answer the question, will tighting down on gun laws really fix these problems?

      July 29, 2012 at 10:09 am | Reply
    • seth

      I agree we need to allow conceal carry into more establishments and have strict training as well as background checks that allow law abiding citizens to carry. Now, I am wondering do these figures include law enforcement and the military. Also, what about illegal guns that are not registered, are they counted? I don’t see how you could every get an accurate representation of these statistics. A couple more things, the Switzerland law requires all inactive members of the military to keep a government weapon with a predetermined number of rounds at their residence. This discourages say Germany from invading them, the weapons are strictly regulated though. And buying an automatic weapon takes a couple months along with a few thousand dollars; it does not however require a class 3. It is very easy to convert a weapon to fully automatic and while its highly illegal, do you think the bad guys care?

      July 29, 2012 at 10:16 am | Reply
    • stacy hopkins

      Any first year stat student knows that correlation does not equal causation. As Mark Twain once said, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." Once someone attaches a number to something, it is suppose to give their point some level of legitimacy. Unfortunately, the stat they use is typically just the side that meets their preconcieved notions.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:19 am | Reply
    • YogiBare

      Missing the woods for the trees by arguing about Fareeds lack of knowledge of automatic weapons. The fact of the matter remains – USA has the most heavily armed civilian population in the world. What is the fascination with gun ownership. There are various ways of controlling gun crimes but restricting the availability and ownership definitely is one of the best ways. You don't need to be an Einstein to deduce that.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:20 am | Reply
      • RickInNY

        What part of ciminals don't follow the laws, don't you understand? Stay in your country and butt out, of US policy, it's none of your business. You want my guns? Come pry them from my dead, cold hands.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:00 am |
      • Kikaider

        And what country would invade the "most heavily armed civilian population in the world"?
        What government would try to tyranize the "most heavily armed civilian population in the world"?
        Point made.

        July 31, 2012 at 6:21 pm |
    • marc andersen

      A great example I use is Germany where the last assassination attempt a crazed individual had to jump across 3 rows and try and stab a political figure with a knife. Armed guards (machine guns) control airports and yes, you guessed it, the authorities carry the machine guns not the citizens thus out gun the bad guys. Common folks let’s get real. What in the hell business does any one have owning a handgun that can shoot consecutively 30 rounds (Gifford) or a rifle that can shoot off 150 rounds in a half a minute (Aurora). I could go on but if you have half a brain and actually consider the facts as written above by Fareed you need to concede that guns without gun control kill.

      Marc W. Andersen, Ph.D., RAC

      July 29, 2012 at 10:22 am | Reply
      • zippy

        I guess that means that knives should also be banned?... It is about as absurd as taking away a gun, because it takes an EVIL PERSON to use that knife or gun to kill someone. Law abiding citizens ARE NOT the ones with guns killing people. Twenty years from now when this country is talking Chinese and living under communist rule, people will look back and say," this all could not have happened without all of the gun control legislation that was forced upon us."

        July 29, 2012 at 10:34 am |
    • zippy

      Another foreigner who wants to see us lose our gun rights. The only reason cnn is publishing this now is because of this bogus UN small arms treaty which is geting voted on soon. Globalists know that they cannot take our country over unless we as a nation are disarmed. They also know that criminals and not guns kill people. They use guns as a vehicle to take away our rights. Many people can't or won't see this as being true.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:26 am | Reply
    • scott bleyle

      The difference between a sniper rifle and my favorite deer gun is the brain connected to the finger on the trigger.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:47 am | Reply
      • Kikaider

        And the color. The sniper rifle is matte black. Thats how the media knows its evil.

        July 31, 2012 at 6:24 pm |
    • Katie

      "Guns don't kill people – people kill people" Well fine, if that's true, so is this one: guns don't keep people safe, PEOPLE keep people safe.

      It's beyond time for stricter gun controls. No one "needs" an automatic weapon. People legally owning handguns should admit to themselves they only have that gun so they can shoot someone with it. There is no other real use for a handgun.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:47 am | Reply
      • scott bleyle

        if guns cause crime,matches cause forest fires.

        July 29, 2012 at 10:49 am |
      • RickInNY

        Katie, go back and stand in line like a good drone.

        July 29, 2012 at 11:03 am |
      • zippy

        How about this: Instead of taking our rights away, which you indicate that that is what is needed. Why don't you move to a country like China who kills their own people on a daily basis in order to keep the other people "in line" with their communist ideals because they have "gun control" instead of actually suggesting our whole country change to suit your needs. This system has worked for all of these years, but all of a sudden, we need to have our gun rights taken away. I served in the US NAVY, I know what this world is ALL About because I have been and lived in foreign countries around the world. We do NOT realize how our system has shielded us from a whole heap of trouble and disparity just waiting off of our coast willing to strike as soon as we let down our guard. Katie, how would you like to see your children in bondage because no one could help you defend them?

        July 29, 2012 at 11:10 am |
    • Darren Gil

      Another anti Second Amendment article written by a non-American.

      Funny how the rest of the world knwos what is best for the greatest nation on Earth.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:47 am | Reply
      • Darren Gil

        Sorry, typo,


        July 29, 2012 at 10:48 am |
      • Riko

        FYI, Fareed Zakaria is an American citizen.

        July 31, 2012 at 4:48 pm |
    • paul close

      Guns are not going anywhere, they are a fact of American life.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:48 am | Reply
    • r2y2

      you mean an idiot like you? because you can make your instant law and execute than trusting a government set law to prohibit before it happens.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:49 am | Reply
    • Tom

      The only time to have stopped this one was before not during the shooting. How many bragging how they would have pulled their CW and taken him out have EVER been shot AT? It's not the range people..you are confused like everyone else, ducking and praying when you hear the first round go by your head.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:54 am | Reply
    • Jason

      II would personally like to know how many homicides occur that are related to illegally obtained firearms and/or firearms that are not legally registered versus homicides with firearms that are legally obtained and registered. Just because somebody owns a firearm doesn't mean they're going to kill somebody. I think aside from laws regarding the purchase and registration of guns possibly being a little lax, what about the laws regarding punishment of those that kill somebody else with a firearm? How many murderers walk free from jail after a short sentence? Or even just life in prison? If our punishment would be more severe for even first time offenders, like instant death penalty, then perhaps that would be a better preventative measure. If you walk into a convenience store kill the clerk(s) and steal the $100 from the register then right after court you get sentenced to death and walked straight to the damn electric chair. Done.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:57 am | Reply
    • Larry Hochendoner

      It is not the analytical component of Fareed's piece on gun control; it is the disappointing and surprising thoughtlessness and disrpect for the advances we have made in understanding and removing the stigma of mental illness. I am in no way competent to assess whether the recent tradegy in Aurora was the result of a deeply dysfunctional apparently sociopathic mind, but I do know that Fareed referring to these civilian mass murders in America as a result of "nutcases" is far below the otherwise erudite, sensitive and insightful bar Farreed has brought to televised reporting. Using a flip word like "nutcase" resurrects and builds stigma re: serious mental health diseases. I just expect more from Fareed in using language as a tool to educate not regress.

      July 29, 2012 at 11:06 am | Reply
      • Thinking

        Fahreed's use of "nutcase" to describe sociopaths and other disturbed individuals was unfortunate. However, the fact remains that such individuals have occurred and will continue to occur in every society. The question is, how does society deal with these people?

        American society does it this way:

        Ignore the mentally ill and hope they go away.
        Provide them with exposure to excessive violence on TV and in movies.
        Make sure that they have the means available to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time.

        No wonder the rest of the world views us as barbaric and a threat to civilization.

        July 29, 2012 at 2:47 pm |
    • vonn

      Well where were they.......We don't have those laws yet..

      July 29, 2012 at 11:09 am | Reply
    • Dave

      "KISS" with an IQ of 60, it is not fair for you to comment on a piece written by Fareed. You are much smarter than he is.

      July 29, 2012 at 11:10 am | Reply
    • Jim

      "FACT: Semi-automatic guns can be turned into FULL-AUTOMATIC in about 10-miniutes... either by purchasing a $50.00 kit on the Internet or if you know your way around guns, by anyone with a little basic knowledge..."

      Which ones? I have AR15's, and that is simply not true about that gun. Please enlighten us as to how exactly this is done. I'm not saying it can't, but let's don't get loose with the facts here. Be specific. Civillian AR-15's can NOT be converted without an entirely new lower receiver. I can't speak for an AK, however. And by the way, AR15's are VERY popular and well suited for hunting. That's what I use mine for, with success.

      One more thing: FACT–These madmen go to places where they are confident no one will be armed. Too bad everyone in Aurora obeyed the no firearms rule in the theater. (Except the bad guy. Funny how they don't follow laws or rules.)

      July 29, 2012 at 11:11 am | Reply
      • Daniel Keating

        Jim..let me preface this by saying I'm an FFL holder (03 Curio & relics) and a CCW holder here in AZ. There are "strap-on" conversion kits that manipulate the trigger–one popular gun show item here in AZ is the "Hellfire Trigger Control" mechanism and there are a few others that are made a bit different. What they do is allow the unpracticed person to do what is known as "bump fire". If you are adept at getting the feel for your trigger you can manipulate the gun as follows WITHOUT the add-ons: You pull the trigger and the gun fires..the recoil pushes the gun back and you push it forward against the recoil to meet the trigger resting at that sweet spot of release–bada bada bada. Google "bump fire AR15" or bump fire AK47 and you will see youtube videos of semi autos ripping through ammo and it's all perfectly legal as the BATF cannot confiscate your trained finger. All that being said, the civilian semi-autos are NOT made for the stress and your rifle just might turn into a hand grenade if you catch my drift–but you & I know that as we're gun guys.

        July 29, 2012 at 3:50 pm |
    • Jessie

      I disagree. First, the obtained statistics you have obtained in large part, come from countries that are not free and are controlled by the government. Second: As a police officer, I have responded to far more car accidents than shootings, resulting in far more deaths, injuries and property damage (to other than the vehicles). Are we going to ban cars? DUI's became a political hot ticket to trumpet political careers years ago, though I never heard any mention of stricter licensing and required training. Where were you and where are you when criminals use vehicles to commit crimes?

      July 29, 2012 at 11:15 am | Reply
    • Ewe Knowhoo

      Guns in America are really a double edged sword.

      July 29, 2012 at 11:19 am | Reply
    • mderosa

      You want to pass stricter gun LAWS. And you expect the criminals to obey the new gun laws while they break other laws?? The Laws will only affect those who respect and obey the laws.......the Criminals will always get their guns. Just look at the brilliant Fast and Furious program carried out by the Obama administration.

      July 29, 2012 at 11:27 am | Reply
      • Nick

        I am tired of hearing people say "criminals don't obey laws". Yeah, criminals don't obey laws that's why we have trials and punishment. If we follow that argument to it's logical end we should not have any laws at all since criminals are going to break them anyway.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:43 pm |
    • Christopher R

      You are a fine writer but this is yet another example of 2 minute journalism... trying to provide a 'yes no' answer to a complex situation, namely if there is a fast and true correlation between gun laws and gun deaths, there should be next to no gun deaths in Illinois, Massachusetts and California while those are among the states with the highest per-capita murder rates. Chicago in particular is totally out of control and probably has the highest murder rate of any major metropolitan area.

      July 29, 2012 at 11:29 am | Reply
    • Liberalnut

      So a narcistic idiot packing heat in a movie theater "THINKS" another person is on the arrack and whips out his concealed weapon starts shooting at that person and another whips his weapon out thinking that person is an assailant and shoots him etc. etc. Showdown at the OK corral. REALLY??

      July 29, 2012 at 11:38 am | Reply
      • Kikaider

        Why would someone THINK that a crazed gunman is killing people and shooting up the place?
        Assuming he's same, the only reason would be, because a crazed gunman IS killing people and shooting up the place!

        There are millions of CCW permitted people in the nation, and people have been carrying weapons since the country began. Yet your specific scenario has NEVER happened. Wonder why that is?

        July 31, 2012 at 6:35 pm |
    • Chris Stiffler

      I think the author should look up international murder rates..Many Gun Controlled European Countries have murder rates right up there with the Gun Toting Crazy Americans...LOL I would soon have a gun when a 300lb wants to come in my house with his bare hands and hurt me or my wife or on the street, God crated ma Colt made us equal. People Kill People Guns are tools, knifes are tool rocks are tools...sometimes so are authors

      July 29, 2012 at 11:40 am | Reply
    • DPG

      If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns. If a law-abiding citizen had a weapon in Aurora, maybe the death toll would have been a little lower.

      July 29, 2012 at 11:44 am | Reply
    • mark glicker

      This guy had something like 50 homemade grenades. With or without gun control he was committing mayhem on that night.

      July 29, 2012 at 11:55 am | Reply
    • d

      That is just not true.

      July 29, 2012 at 11:57 am | Reply
    • loren

      New York and Chicago and LA all have strict gin control laws .......... but they have majot crime statistics. What the guy in the article does not show is that the crimes are committed by criminals ..... who would not pay attention to the laws anyway.......... majority of gun crimes are committed by people who are second and third time offenders ,,,,,,,,,, apply the laws we have .. and we will not nee any new ones ...... last point ............. look at the countries with less guns ...... how many are free, how many have been overran by other countries ................. we have not ............. because we all have guns.

      July 29, 2012 at 11:57 am | Reply
    • catmoondaddy

      The term assault weapon was first used by gun control advocates to evoke emotional rasponses of fear and anger in people. Technically, many guns used for hunting and target shooting are considered assault weapons (multi-capacity) and therein lies the problem. If gun control advocates want to ban "assault weapons", they will literally take most weapons out of the hands of law abiding citizens. I have a .22 rifle (the lowest caliber or size bullet) I use for target practice. It can hold up to ten rounds per magazine. I could LEGALLY carry as many magazines as I want so therefore have the ability to kill up to say 100 people with my gun. The only difference between my and the Aurora killer is that he is a nutcase.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Reply
    • Manuel

      I picture Fareed Zakaria sitting in a movie theatre with his wife and children if he has any, and a crazy monster walks in and starts chopping heads off with a short sword. Zakaria stands up and clicks his heels and he and his family are transported back home to the safety of their living room and the monster is gone.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:03 pm | Reply
    • Chris

      What happened in Colorada is unquestionably a tragedy, but look at the map of civilian gun ownership. Where do rogue "militia" men and anti or pro government terrorists roam the streets killing indescriminately? This doesn't happen in America or most west European countries.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:03 pm | Reply
    • scott bleyle

      Korea takes first gold as a female wins shooting sport and U.S. needs gun control? De Palma team was once best in the world and target sports were more popular than baseball,American's learned in gym class! "Those who would trade freedom for a temporary sense of security,deserve neither" Benjamin Franklin.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:07 pm | Reply
    • cwfusto

      Mr. Fareed doesn't discuss that Americans are far better off than most of these countries as well. and don't bring in Belgium, Iceland etc. as having higher standards of living. IF they had the amount of citizens we have they'd be in the dumps, but because they control population and immigration, they can have a functioning social agenda.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Reply
    • Kanjaji

      @Fareed. Your statistics and map are disingenuous. Dead is dead no matter how you are murdered. A clearly more valid comparison would be to look at overall homicide rates in each country. When you do so you will find that the US is somewhere in the middle and that many of the gun control countries are way ahead in the homicide rate.

      Lastly, adjust the statistics for deaths related to gangs and drugs and you will find that the homicide rate by firearms in the US is actually pretty low. Do you honestly think gun control laws will keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

      July 29, 2012 at 12:25 pm | Reply
    • Sharon Freeman

      The idea of using laws to control outlaws has more problems with basic logic than I can begin to point out here. What seems to be escaping these news pundits is that many of these mass murderers, the Colorado murderer included, also have explosives as their weapon. If we somehow, magically, get these individuals to actually follow the new laws, they will simply change weapons to accomplish the same ends. What isn't being discuss, that needs to be discussed, is that the mental health system in the U.S. is what is broken. There were clear signs of a psychotic disorder, yet the law prevents mental health providers (what few exist these days) from protecting the public. Fix this problem and we will reduce violence exponentially.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:28 pm | Reply
    • kooolguy


      July 29, 2012 at 12:31 pm | Reply
    • Alton Ingram

      Wow our news is posting charts from 2007... Using a survey which requires truth of the person being interviewed as your facts! I think you and CNN should check your facts before posting false articles. Maybe look at the facts, compare gun crimes with illegal guns vs gun crimes with legal guns. Let's start with that!!

      CNN, Allowing your journalists to post this is non-american.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:39 pm | Reply
    • coinfiender

      I spent 5 minutes reading responses to your article and it's more than obvious that people take you for a leftist moron. I sell gold, silver, and high end currency. Do you really believe the police will respond in time "IF" I can hit my panic button? All of us do not live in larger, more violent cities, like NY,LA, or Miami. We live in suburbia,such as Aurora CO, and other small towns with a police force of 4 or 5 men. Do you think they could have stopped this tragedy. What do you want, a soldier at every corner? Move to China then. I've had a CC permit for 3 years, never had to pull it, hopefully won't. But if my life or another (including your Butt) was in danger of being killed, I think you might change your mind. NOW, why don't you interview those in the internet cafe, who's live we saved by a man with a CC permit and ask them how they feel?

      July 29, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Reply
    • t keller

      The problem isn't what type of guns are being used. The problem is uncontrolled access. If guns could be bought only in registered gun stores (not via mail order or in gun shows) and buyers had to provide picture ID's, it should be possible to weed out a lot of the nut cases, gang bangers, etc.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:43 pm | Reply
      • Orion

        what are you talking about? NO ONE can buy firearms over the internet without going thru an FFL and completing the NICS check. It's been this way for years!
        LOL... your ignorance is showing today. REALLY SHOWING.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:46 pm |
      • Daniel Keating

        T Keller–I have a federal Firearms license–this allows me to purchase over the internet. Without this permit , I could still buy the gun BUT it would have to be shipped to a local FFL holder who would then have to fill out a 4473 transfer form and do a background check on me before allowing me to take possession of it. I would have to pay for the gun up front to the original out of state seller and a transfer fee of $25-$40 to the local licensee who does the paperwork on me. Any time I deal with private party sellers at gun shows I've been asked for my state ID/drivers license and we do a private bill of sale. It protects both parties. I can prove that I did NOT own the gun before a certain point in time in case it was a recycled crime weapon and the seller can prove that he sold the gun in good faith and did not own it after a point in time in case it's found later at a crime scene and the police are tracing ownership. Nobody can just order a gun–that went bye bye in 1964 after JFK was killed with a mail order rifle. Once upon a time there were no such things as "gun shops"–guns were sold in auto parts stores , hardware stores etc. Abercrombie & Fitch sold guns in their habedashery dept (mens accessories)

        July 29, 2012 at 4:47 pm |
    • thoughts

      Laws are made for honest law abiding citizens. The people who murder, whether mass or single, are not honest law abiding citizens. Now the real question is how to spot someone who is not honest and law abiding prior to an illegal act. Once this is done, how do you stop people from turning in the neighbor as they did during Hitler's time. There again, how to spot an honest person.......

      July 29, 2012 at 12:43 pm | Reply
    • rde

      I find it interesting that our Pakistani reporter has forgotten to analyize Washington DC- the one place in the US with the most strict gun laws and has the highest rate of gun violence in America. How does Fareed explain that fact- I mean he made the statement that we are dealing with facts aren't we- or is this the typical editorial where the writer only focuses on the facts that support thier own conclusion?- oh wait this is CNN....

      July 29, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Reply
    • Carla Vazq

      It's too late to try and take the guns away. You can stop making them in the USA but then they will be imported illegally.

      Prevention is key. In most countries around the civilized world there is better "in country" security.

      For instance. In most South American countries and Central America there is a presence of security. There are security guards at Burger King and Dairy Queen. It isn't to protect against "murder" or "mass murder". It simply is protection again thieves. And the security is armed with machine guns and protective vests.

      If the theater was built like most of those in South America the "joker" would have not gotten in.

      The sad fact is, "911 did not wake up anyone in the USA". And "911" did not shock the world as the US Government wants everyone to believe. It is fact that "911" was expected and it was a matter of time.

      The USA is the biggest target in the world. The USA has a huge problem.

      Take a good look at the demographics of the USA. Who lives in the USA. Who owns the guns. Who has most to gain over a war with the US Government?

      The real threat comes from the south and not the middle east.

      Spanish Speaking Americans know what is coming. Get ready white people.

      Don't be so naive. Did you know that the government collects more information than what is stated on that application for a firearm?

      The big war is coming. It will be a soft war. A war with guns but very few bullets fired. The gangs are getting larger and more sophisticated with their finances and organization practices. They are merging across the country. These "gangs" are not to be called gangs anymore. They are militias that is scaring the white man. There are too many for the governments to monitor and still monitor the rest of the world.

      Put simple. History repeats itself. Compared to the rest of the world the USA is young. It hasn't had time to fail, but the time is coming. It's obvious.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:55 pm | Reply
    • russmonster

      "We are the world’s most heavily-armed civilian population. One out of every three Americans knows someone who has been shot."

      Yeah, i bet a ton, if not most, of those are military vets.

      This debate comes up whenever a sociopath goes on a rampage. This year, since it's an election year, we get more debates. Had there not been a tradgedy brought about by a sociopath, none of us would be talking about it.

      Califnornia has some of the strictest gunlaws in the country. Guess what? Criminals still use guns every day to comit crime. They use cars too. Knives. Fists, feet, bottles... The list could go on and on and on. You know what most of the law abiding citizens in CA do when the state decides to ban a weapon they own? They ship it to someone they know living out of state. I know many people in the security field. People that teach firearm classes for armed security, they also teach concealled carry. Most of the ones i know in the sacramento area have storage in nevada for thier "illigal" firearms. So now we have an environment where law abiding citizens feel they need to skirt the laws. And your criminals just keep the ones they have or steal. They dont turn them in.

      Maybe if a few other people in those situations had firearms, and were trained in their use, you would have fewer deaths. I'm not trying to diminish what happened. The people that were injured and killed were done so by someone, that had they had no guns, might well have rented a giant uhual and drove it through the crowd while they were all gathered around waiting to get in. Someone who wants to comit mass murder is going to find a way to do it. Guns, or no guns.

      July 29, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Reply
    • Mike

      Unless the madmen never had the gun to begin with. We need the break the cycle of more people have more guns so we need more and more deadly guns to counter the threat to protect our self as this is a never ending and downward spiral based on fear. Not the evolution of a civil society that we should aspire to be.

      July 29, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Reply
      • A different Mike

        These people can't think ahead. It's not possible. It's all "now" with crazy romanticized hollywood-style what ifs.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:08 pm |
    • Orion

      Zakaria understands even less than Daniel Webster. what a bunch of crap!!
      .this network has their people working overtime trying to spread doubt on America's Second Amendment.

      July 29, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Reply
    • Mark

      I agree. Only people who follow the laws about gun control are the law abiding people. These gun contrll laws only help to reduce the amount of guns they can have If they didn't have the strict restriction, someone in the audience may have had a gun to kill the shooter. But as you seen, no one in the audience had one because of gun control laws.

      It is not the gun that kills a person. It is the person wielding it with bullets.

      July 29, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Reply
    • Mack

      A madman without a gun is much easier to stop than one with a gun-Common Sense.

      July 29, 2012 at 1:35 pm | Reply
    • jo

      9/11 was an inside job. google building 7

      July 29, 2012 at 1:35 pm | Reply
    • wxqz

      The Aurora Killings represent the convergence of the glorification of extreme violence in the media and the over access to the tools of extreme violence in real life. Aurora, Columbine, Virginia Tech, and too many others. Including kids finding guns lying around shooting each other by accident cause they saw it on TV or in the movies.

      And the gun lobby evokes the 2nd amendment. But the right to possess weapons of extreme violence to commit mass murder is not a protected right.

      July 29, 2012 at 1:36 pm | Reply
    • Robin

      Your data is not good.

      What you have is that the USA is REPORTING gun sales in such a way you can look it up and use the data in your pretty pictures.

      You aren't comparing apples to apples.

      July 29, 2012 at 1:41 pm | Reply
    • Yon

      "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
      Ben Franklin
      American Statesman

      July 29, 2012 at 1:46 pm | Reply
    • Yon

      "What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
      Thomas Jefferson
      to James Madison

      July 29, 2012 at 1:48 pm | Reply
      • jayla smith

        ikr yyou are so smart

        October 3, 2012 at 10:29 am |
    • Mperez

      Fareed Zakaria is not a real american by birth. So how can he critic our foundation of society? The 1st ammendment allows him, a foreigner, to say whatever he wants. The second ammendment allows me, a citizen by birth, to bear arms.

      July 29, 2012 at 1:52 pm | Reply
    • sylar75

      Or make sure he doesn't have a gun but that is just crazy talk. If we had psychiatric evaluations beofre buying fire arms no Republican would ever be able to buy one!!

      July 29, 2012 at 2:00 pm | Reply
    • zooni

      The gun violence in the US is a result of two factors. The war on drugs and the ability of a mentally challenged person to attain a weapon. Fix those 2 problems and the gun violence would be on par with the rest of the civilized world.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:01 pm | Reply
    • Mike

      Nothing other than making sure evry state can carry conceal.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:02 pm | Reply
    • larry

      The mass-murdering tyrants of the past all believed in "gun control".

      An armed citizenry is the only thing which will help prevent tyranny. And if you don't understand that, you deserve to be enslaved. Me and my loved ones will continue to fight for our liberties and freedom. God Bless the USA. Peace.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Reply
      • Hugh grant

        I agree !!

        July 29, 2012 at 2:17 pm |
    • Marie

      Let's go back to old west times then.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Reply
      • carrie james

        uhh marie your slow becayse dont nobody wanna go back to the western times uhh whats wrong with you r u dum?

        October 3, 2012 at 10:32 am |
      • carrie james

        uhh marie your slow because dont nobody wanna go back to the western times uhh whats wrong with you r u dum?

        October 3, 2012 at 10:34 am |
    • Mike

      Also, I would like to choose whether I can own a gun to protect my family and choose whether or not we will have health care. Oddly enough I have chosen to do both of these things. Key word....Choice

      July 29, 2012 at 2:13 pm | Reply
    • Hugh grant

      The murderer in Colorado was quite capable of performing mayhem, as evidenced by the bomb rigging of his apartment – If there had been someone else in the theatre, it is quite likely this horror would have prevented, or at least minimized !! Gun-banners have a psychological problem, and need help !!

      July 29, 2012 at 2:15 pm | Reply
    • Andrew

      He he, yes, we should all walk around with guns. That is the way to resolve this issue.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:21 pm | Reply
    • cleareye1

      Serious restrictions on the sale of ammo could help a lot along with jail time for possessing an automatic weapon, hand grenades, land mines, rpgs, etc.
      All societies have a weakling class that is frightened of everyone else and tries to compensate for their inadequacy. The NRA specializes in marketing gun products to those people, and very successfully. The entire gun culture is a creation of the manufacturers, the NRA is only the mouthpiece. If you want to have some proof, just look into how much the executive staff at the NRA ia paid.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Reply
    • B. Estep

      I will gladly give up my guns, just as soon as they take them away from the criminals. Gun control hurts no one except law-abiding citizens. You think the criminals care whether they get their guns legally or not? To say that gun control prevents gun crime is an absolute lie. The threat of me being armed deters a criminal from trying to rob me.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:30 pm | Reply
    • oliver

      I am the owner of romenywhitehouse2012.com obamaforthewhitehouse.com and patrioticcitizen.com contact dadslilstinker@gmail.com if interested in owning any of the above

      Thank you,


      July 29, 2012 at 2:36 pm | Reply
    • Richard

      That map showing the countries with higher rates of gun ownership is the best argument imaginable for the right to own guns.

      Look at all the countries and areas with low gun ownership, by and large, backward repressed areas and areas with oppressive central govts. The middle east, China, Russia. higher gun ownership rates in the US, Canada, much parts of Europe.

      Fewer guns, more dictators.

      I'll take the occasional nutjob over the daily grind of an oppressive government, for life, any day.

      When you give individuals more freedom, some of them will use it to do amazing things for their fellow man, like Steve Jobs, so, of course, with the freedom to do great things comes the freedom to do the opposite. Build better societies, better people. That is the way to reduce evil.

      Repressive control efforts, of guns are anything else, is at best a poor patch job, at worst, a cure that is worse than the disease.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:37 pm | Reply
      • Mike

        Yep, thats why right after work I am going to get me some tanks, rocket launchers, submarines, fighter jets, drones and a couple of aircraft carriers and nukes for good measure so my government never chooses to repress me. If this is your fear, I've got news for you in that you will always be out gunned.

        July 31, 2012 at 5:41 pm |
    • TC Citizen

      areed Zakaria can show all the stats that he wants but at the end of the day, how many crimes have been committed by people that have legally bought and posses firearms? The answer is none. I think a reed Zakaria should move to England where he can feel safer.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:38 pm | Reply
    • Chuck

      I totally AGREE! If more people were armed these idiots could be stopped. The police only take names after the crime was committed.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:39 pm | Reply
    • emintey

      Look at the nature of these responses, and they dont even realize it, Americans are totally out of thier minds about guns, dwelling on irrelevencies and not confronting the real issues presented, it doesnt freaking MATTER that the M-16 the killers use only fires with each trigger pull, it's still 60 round/min, there is something very seriously wrong with Americans and their guns. No, I dont think you people will ever step back and see it.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:41 pm | Reply
    • jmissal

      Exactly....the fella gave up as soon as he was confronted by another person with a gun (police). Perhaps (speculation here) all that body armor was just for show and had someone in the theater been able to shoot back, the loss of life would not have been so great.

      The bottom line is that, regardless of what you want to believe, this Nation is THIS Nation due to civilian ownership of firearms and their willingness/ability to use them in the face of governmental tyranny. That, ladies and gents, is the ONLY reason the Second Amendment exists.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:52 pm | Reply
    • margo

      Amen Mr.Zakaria. Finally looking at the real problem here. His facts speaks volumes. The US is gun slinging society and we should all be ashamed. This psycho even got bullets without a background check and a large volume. Until the gun laws change and automatic weapons are taken off the streets, these shooting will most definitely continue as they have since columbine.

      July 29, 2012 at 2:55 pm | Reply
    • Fred M.

      So stop making it so easy for madmen to buy guns. In other countries where gun ownership is far lower, so is the incidence of murder and suicide. Either address the point of the article, and the statistics, or stop posting.

      And, no, he could not have used a bomb any more than a pedophile could molest a dog, rather than a child, to satisfy his sick urges. In countries where there are stricter gun laws, you don't see an equivalent number suicides and homicides by bomb. So, the whole bomb thing is disproven and I don't want any more posting about it.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:09 pm | Reply
      • John M3

        A lot of dead Iraqis, Afghanis and Israelis would probably disagree with you.

        July 29, 2012 at 6:58 pm |
    • Pushover1234

      When you have a group i funnelling guns to drug dealers, wht do you expect? And by the way, make sure the President actualy knows the weapon used in the crime...shows what a moron he is.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:15 pm | Reply
      • Fred M.

        The President is not a "moron" for not being a gun-obsessed redneck like you. If you pull the trigger and the gun fires the round, ejects the casing, and chambers the next round, then it's automatic. I don't care what you and the editors of Guns and Ammo call it. It doesn't have a bolt that must be manually cycled, so it's automatic. F off.

        July 29, 2012 at 3:53 pm |
    • DJR

      Should spend a moment viewing Syria and Libia, guns would have made a difference. Americans, simply put, do not trust their government or any other.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:21 pm | Reply
    • Agnar150

      This is so true. If someone in the audience would have been carrying a gun they could have stopped this crazy guy sooner. It would have saved peoples lives.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:24 pm | Reply
    • James Baker

      Isn't the point of the article that it would be easier to stop a madman from getting a gun, than to stop him after he opens fire? How about just keeping madmen from getting 100-round magazines? Is there really a rational "self-defense" argument why civilians need access to a 100-round magazine? If we as a nation are too inept to take steps to keep guns out of the hands of crazy people, let's at least agree they shouldn't be able to easily acquire such clips. Can we all agree that having 7 people needlessly shot is a little bit better than 70?

      July 29, 2012 at 3:26 pm | Reply
      • DeanNandana

        So we ban 100-round mags? 99-round mags come on the market and all the existing 100-rounders become more valuable. Net accomplishment? Zero.

        July 30, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
    • Claybee

      I have to ask, how many other countries accurately record gun ownership per capita. I can tell you that the USA is most likely one of maybe 50 that does. 50 is generous, I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here. I find your argument to be intellectually dishonest, you're opinion on gun control was clearly formed before the incident. Whereas, the tragedy is used as more support to a predisposed stance on the issue. I find it disappointing and abhorrent that this garbage is even posted on an international news source, you should be ashamed of yourself.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:41 pm | Reply
    • Destiny

      "The only way to stop a mad man with a gun blah blah"

      Yeah because the only thing that would've been better than one guy having a gun in the middle of a dark chaotic crowd of scrambling individuals, would be two guys with a gun...GET REAL! You know what would have been even better? If NO ONE involved had a gun. Just because our founding fathers (who also believed that African Americans should be enslaved, women shouldn't have the right to vote or own property) believed that bearing arms was a right that we should be granted does not deem it a good idea by any means. When one analyzes gun statistics, there is hardly any evidence to conclude that "self-defense" gun use has made us any safer as individuals or as a nation.

      To those stating that there are other ways to make weapons (house-hold cleaners etc) so banning guns would be useless, the issue with guns is that you can kill someone on impulse or quick-rage, unlike more calculated mechanisms to commit murder. The other factor is that bleach or whatever, is not created with the INTENTION of someone using it for homicidal purposes, unlike automatic or semi-automatic weapons.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:41 pm | Reply
    • Michael

      Only people that like to commit crimes have guns. The Bible says to love your neighbor. You can't love that neighbor when you have a gun. Those that have a gun want to shoot their neighbor. People say? I Need that gun for protection. My response was where were all those guns on the day Holmes decided to go on a shooting rampage? See all you gun owners in hades. 🙂

      July 29, 2012 at 3:48 pm | Reply
      • Kikaider

        You're a nutcase. I own a handgun. I do not 'commit crimes'. 99.9% percent of American gun owners never have, and never will, commit a crime with a gun.

        Bring the Bible into it however you like. But if Kind David had guns, you can bet your bottom dollar his army would have been packing.

        July 31, 2012 at 6:51 pm |
    • Tom

      Oh, great. Another gun "expert"/biased hack-with-a-platform who can't wait to use/abuse the latest hi-tech tools of his profession-computer, internet, cell phones, fax, etc.-to slice and dice the second amendment while blindly hiding behind the presumption that his first amendment rights will always be safe and secure. What a hypocrite.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:53 pm | Reply
    • Bootyfunk

      yeah, like a police officer. everyone else carrying and pulling guns... yeah, that'll make things much safer.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:55 pm | Reply
    • Scott

      I agree with dolapoidris post. I disagree with Fareed's argument that this is not a psychology matter. Americans drive much more than the rest of the world as well and as a result of having that freedom there are alot of deaths caused by vehicles. In fact I would probably be safe in assuming that the number of vehicle deaths in this country far exceed the deaths caused by firearms probably orders of magnitude greater. Yet the argument from people who share Fareed's ideology on this matter would probably say this is something that happens when so many people are allowed to drive cars. If the goal is to save lives, then banning private ownership of vehicles would save many ,many more lives but is ridiculous as well. Its just the fear of someone jumping out of the bushes with an AK scares these people to death even though they are far more likely to be slaughtered by some 16 year old kid in a Jetta or some 85 year old man in his Oldsmobile and the manner of death is just as horrific especially when they hit some family of five in a minivan head on. Im pretty sure the only reason we are not living in a military dicatatorship today is because 70 Million Americans have firearms. That exceeds the number of soldiers in the standing armies of the rest of the world combined. This should be a source of pride not shame.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:56 pm | Reply
    • John

      The is one Fact that I didn't see in this article. Criminals don't really follow the law. If you add more gun control laws the only people who are it will impact are the law abiding citizens. I am pretty sure there is already a law on the books about not killing people, with a gun or a hammer. If someone is going to commit a crime a law will not stop them from doing so.

      July 29, 2012 at 4:02 pm | Reply
    • Jamie

      This article is a joke. It is based on a SURVEY, not statistics that encompass gun violence and murder by fire arms in general. Horribly deceptive. Gun ownership does not equate to gun violence, and this SURVEY probably encompasses registered gun owners at the exclusion of those who buy guns aside from government approval. Look at this article: http://worldnews.about.com/od/crime/tp/Top-Murder-Rates-In-The-World.htm. The U.S. doesn't even compare to the rest of the Americas, much less the world, when it comes to violent murders, individual and mass murder combined. Stop slanting your articles, CNN.

      July 29, 2012 at 4:04 pm | Reply
    • ben weber

      the facts?????????????? germany has very strict gun laws, a smaller population, and yet more school shootings than the US. Look it up, you will find it to be so. Too bad farid didnt take the time to.

      July 29, 2012 at 4:11 pm | Reply
    • Suicide Bombers DONT use GUNS but are just as successful

      People who don't have access to guns still want people to die so they use bombs, machetes, and chemicals. You're going to tell me that in Africa all the genocide could have been prevented with tighter gun control? Wait! they used machetes to kill. I guess that's a great idea. Then lets take away all knives, guns and then don't forget cars. Oh wait once people get smart and evolve we have to quarantine people from people because this will solve all social violent problems. Look if we want to understand the violence in America we have to look at our social problem along with or pyschotic citizens. We have kids who are bullies, kids who are fat, parents who kills their children and more news about movie stars than economic education. Our problem isn't with guns but ignorant America/world.

      July 29, 2012 at 4:20 pm | Reply
    • Arno

      A couple of concealed carry permit holders packing in that theater would have drastically reduced the casualty count. Could there be a mistake? sure but not a 70 odd persons getting shot mistake. When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Police can't be everywhere at the same time.

      July 29, 2012 at 4:27 pm | Reply
    • ResistMuslims

      Do we really want to start taking advice from a sand rat? I'm sure you would love to have all of our guns gone. Go back where you came from.

      gotta love you little Satanist smile

      July 29, 2012 at 4:35 pm | Reply
    • calmthinker

      I'd like to suggest a quick course in statistical analysis for CNN journalists–actually for all journalists for that matter. If the rate of gun ownership has gone up from 2000 to 2009 and yet the rate of gun fatalities has remained level, that makes for a per capita decrease in gun-related murders.

      The point of Mr. Zakaria's editorial is that we can't ignore facts. Correct. Neither can he.

      Likewise, Mr. Zakaria points out that we cannot make up facts. Correct. Neither can he.

      Mr. Zakaria suggests that we cannot help the mentally insane, we can only control the public's access to guns. Research proves this to be incorrect. Research has proven time and again that controlling the general population's access to gun ownership does NOT control the criminal sector's access to gun ownership. Further, there is a huge body of science that indicates mental health therapies do in fact work. Why would we pursue Mr. Zakaria's unproven, hypothesis over a scientifically substantiated option. We won't.

      Because the other fact that Mr. Zakaria chooses to ignore is that it is that this country is founded on the right of its citizens to bear arms. It is unlikely that pseudo facts perpetrated as hard evidence will change our citizen's position on this matter.

      I would have more respect for Mr. Zakaria if he would admit the content of his piece reflected his opinions and not factual evidence that cannot be disputed. His opinions are real. His opinions matter. But they are not based on sound fact and they are "in-fact" lol undermined by the sheer shamefulness that he peddles them as irrefutable evidence.

      July 29, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Reply
    • Alfred KNow

      As Mr Zakaria says, we can argue about the details like how hard it is to get an automatic weapon but the Stats remain the same: We have more guns per 100 people than any other country on the planet and we have more deaths from guns per 100 people than anywhere else on the planet by a country mile. Any questions? This is a very useful website for data:

      July 29, 2012 at 4:42 pm | Reply
    • Steve N

      Considering we have a large preponderance of guns, I would say we are remarkably civilized. It is idiotic to talk about the small number of deaths in the USA due to guns compared to the very preventable 30-40 PEOPLE KILLED PER DAY IN THE USA due to DRUNK DRIVERS.

      July 29, 2012 at 4:44 pm | Reply
    • ED

      Well said!

      July 29, 2012 at 4:46 pm | Reply
    • Loki

      "Time to face FACTS" FZ is a "sissy" who invents conclusions from faulty statistics. Can't you for once just act like a man ?

      July 29, 2012 at 5:02 pm | Reply
    • willford

      I cannot for the life of me see how people believe all the B.S. in this article! I guess they need to drink more FOOL-AID 4 libs

      July 29, 2012 at 5:02 pm | Reply
    • Jlc

      How about trying to prevent guns from ending up in the hands of madmen in the first place?

      July 29, 2012 at 6:10 pm | Reply
    • Jmz

      Dont any of you find it wierd that this happens right Asthe in is coming out with small arms treaty,kind of like it was ment to stir the pot about firearms, I will say this people guns don't kill people people do you don't take cars away when a drunk driver kills people. The only thing keeping the government at bay is the fact that we are an armed society. Take away the guns (which will never happen) and then see how the govt exercises it's brand new NDAA policies on your unarmed asses,can you say police state. Wake up people

      July 29, 2012 at 7:13 pm | Reply
    • Frank

      I'm not a fan of fire arms because they project a lethal force for such a large distance. Allows an individual of any mental state to do a lot more damage than one can do otherwise. But I also realize that many people are in favor of this and the argument becomes heated emotional shouting matches. That will never end.

      However, I do feel the cost of any economic good should cover all the costs associated with it. Guns and ammo do a lot of damage to humans and other property. We should be taxing ammo/ guns and use the funds to setup a shooting victim recovery fund. I also strongly suspect a majority of the people who own guns would not trust the government to handle this, so we should empower the NRA to collect these levies and make them responsible for all the damage done by weapons.

      Its the least we can do for the thousands of people who get injured and maimed by weapons.

      July 29, 2012 at 7:25 pm | Reply
      • Freedom

        You are perfect socialist. Tax everything and give up your rights to the government.. Don't like something , tax it and pass a law..no individual freedom..

        July 30, 2012 at 1:16 pm |
    • Gold-n-Gunz

      All I can say is http://www.uscca.com check it out

      July 29, 2012 at 7:26 pm | Reply
    • common sense

      OK so the murder rate with firearms in the US is higher than anywhere else. That would be like saying the number of people who strike their thumbs with hammers is highest among carpenters. It does not mean carpenters are more clumsy. Look at real crime statistics for the rest of the world. MURDER -Not handgun murder to get real statistics.

      July 29, 2012 at 9:30 pm | Reply
    • queenbee10

      Well....Opinions about gun control ignore that prior to the availability of semi automatics and automatics–we had mass murders.

      The Weapons ranged from axes to gas and poisons to knives. What has remained consistent in the cases of wholesale murder is WHO overwhelmingly performs such acts:

      Usually... a male–ages 14-65.

      Usually a white male–you can count the number of black, hispanic, asians, etc combined on both hands and feet but the number of white males who have committed either mass murder or serial killings number in the high dozens.

      We can argue that the men and women who kill are mentally ill or under great stress. We can argue that familial killings are different from killing strangers. We can even argue the method and ease of access to guns or poisons etc–here is what does not change:

      9 times out of 10–the killer will be a male.

      8 times out of 10 the killer will be white

      6 times out of 10 the killer will know at least some of his victims

      6 times out of 10 the killer will also kill himself

      10 times out of 10 no matter how this plays out–unless the killer is a minority–the media and the blogging public will never relate the crime to race or wonder what is wrong within the white race and specifically with white males.

      Whites are always quick to point out and denigrate other races for the bad among their groups–yet in the crimes whites overwhelmingly commit, they are strangely silent and reticent–why is that?

      July 29, 2012 at 9:45 pm | Reply
    • GAW

      Yup All we needed in Aurora is several people with guns blazing away in a dark movie theater with mass panic everywhere. Let's be honest here everyone wants to be a hero and be like Dirty Harry.

      July 29, 2012 at 9:57 pm | Reply
    • RB

      Your argument is the primary reason people own guns.
      So are you saying people in Colorado don't take their guns with them when they go out to watch a movie. Or may be they just don't own those semi-automatic guns. What a shame. This whole disaster could be averted if everybody went to movies with a gun.

      On the other hand, if there were tight gun control laws in country, may be law enforcement would have noticed that someone bought an illegal gun.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:04 pm | Reply
    • ZakarriaBlows

      Fareed, what other rights of mine would you like to take away? You have your face so far up Obama's bum that you cant even see the obvious.... That is, outlaw guns and only criminals will have them! This concept of thinking that if guns are outlawed the bloods on the street will turn them in is absolutely insane! India, your origin, is way more un-regulated than here, and guess what??!?!?!?!?! They are doing wayyy better than we are right now!

      July 29, 2012 at 10:07 pm | Reply
    • jimbo

      Bingo! A mad man WITH A GUN. Take away the guns and a mad man is easy to stop, no gun required.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:09 pm | Reply
    • John C

      On the subject of facts and statistics, I made an interesting discovery when trying to compile "facts" while doing a final project at Harvard. There are only a few municipalities that explicitly outlaw ownership of firearms (especially handguns). Most notable of them are DC and Chicago. My project involved correlating deaths by firearms to firearm ownership and required data from the FBI (which maintains these statistics). Unfortunately, no data on these types of crimes was available for Illinois or DC. Why is that? Why did the FBI have data for all other states but these? It's just a coincidence, I'm sure. And by the way, the result of my analysis was that firearm ownership does not deter or promote gun-related death. It's the lack of correlation in this data that keeps the topic hot; it's highly speculative.


      July 30, 2012 at 12:23 am | Reply
    • Erik

      I guess we should also start taking away automobiles. Automobile related fatalities kill more people every year than any other cause. And don't forget the alcohol as well.

      July 30, 2012 at 1:20 am | Reply
    • prediction

      We never should have change the laws for pychological definition of the need to be held for the public safety. Quite some time ago we release half of the psychological dangerous population refining what is dangerous. Now there are large number of street people that should be put away. But we are to cheap to do the right thing.

      July 30, 2012 at 1:34 am | Reply
      • The Devil's Duo

        In which country did this happen?

        July 30, 2012 at 7:33 am |
    • prediction

      We should never have released half criminally insane to save money.

      July 30, 2012 at 1:44 am | Reply
    • Allen

      In the end that is what did stop him: men with guns. If the mad men are left without the ability to buy guns maybe the illegal bomb laws will stop them from buying bombs. Or maybe the illegal to fly an airplane into a building law will stop them from obtaining a plane. More laws...well, I guess all the anti-cocaine laws work. No one dies from overdosing on cocaine. Right?

      July 30, 2012 at 3:28 am | Reply
    • Brian

      This article is terrible and is a failed attempt to compare all gun owners in the US to a single psychopath. This lousy reporter is a sick individual for taking a horrific event and trying to use it to make a point for something completely unrelated.

      July 30, 2012 at 6:58 am | Reply
    • Mike N.

      Gun control has been the weapon of tyrants from the nazis all the way thru mao and a dozen others. If gun controls worked Chicago would be the safest city in the country. The second ammendment is NOT open for negotiation!!!

      July 30, 2012 at 7:18 am | Reply
    • Richard

      Read the article. Know the facts. Do your reseach and whenever possible stop thinking with your heart. The facts show the rate of homicides from firearms has not dropped at all. We all have guns but we continue to kill each other at the same rate. You are no safer today protecting yourself from a death from firearm than you were years ago.

      July 30, 2012 at 11:07 am | Reply
    • Mark

      Every male citizen who has served in the military (its mandatory) in Switzerland has a gun, nice analysis Fareed. So if every household has a gun there, why isn't there killing? This article seems to say that guns are the cause of killing? People are the cause of killing. You think this brilliant kid (and unfortunately he was) couldn't have figured out another way to kill 12 people? You really think that only allowing the government to own guns and not the citizens will keep us safer? Allow the government to control our lives will make our lives better? Come on. Gun control is not the answer, though it is a warm and fuzzy one. Sounds about as good as "helping" poor people by giving them hand outs. That has worked GREAT for the past 50 years. We're in great shape as a country. In fact, just take more power from the people and give it to the government and I figure all our problems should go away here soon. Good luck America.

      July 30, 2012 at 11:23 am | Reply
    • setnommarih

      Dear Mr. Zakaria, please utilize your GPS to find your butt back to where it came from and take your fancy EU, socialism with you.

      July 30, 2012 at 11:58 am | Reply
    • JSMAN

      Any first year university student could tell you that correlation does not prove causation. In 2001, there are roughly 500 electrocutions per year in the us. Should we outlaw electricity? My heart goes out to the people in Colorado, but it's time to face the real facts:
      1) A gun is a tool, just like electricity.
      2) Bad things happen, and we can't just pass a law to prevent bad things from happening. If that were the case, why don't we just outlaw death and all our problems would go away?

      July 30, 2012 at 12:23 pm | Reply
    • Gun Owner

      You are wrong in your claim that gun owners deny facts. There are more guns in the homes of Americans for a number of reasons. The primary reason is that we can afford to have them. These luxuries are not high on the priority list of someone living in a third world country. Discuss murder rates among the world's countries and see where the US ranks there. Then, we can have a discussion. Obviously, if we have more guns, we will have more gun crimes. However, more gun crimes does not mean more total crimes...which is what we gun owners are saying: More guns does not equal more total crimes.

      July 30, 2012 at 12:38 pm | Reply
    • Steve in Colorado

      An eye for an eye will make us both blind- Ghandi

      July 30, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Reply
    • Dave

      I am waiting for some nut job to drive a car straight through a marching band so everyone can scream for restrictions on who is allowed to purchase a vehicle. Then when someone walks into a day care and bashes 15 kids with a Baseball bat, what then.... do we put legislation out there to limit who can purchase a Baseball bat???? What do we do when some nut job puts 20, full propane tanks in a van and drives it into the front door of a chucky cheese? are we all going to have to get background checks done to get a tank of propane for our gas grill????? God Bless America.

      July 30, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Reply
    • Steve

      Couldn't agree more dolapoidris. I would be willing to bet a significant sum that if this happened at a theatre in WV, someone would have ended it rather quickly by taking out this lunatic with a hollow point of his/her own. Obama sits here and says he understands that we need weapons to "hunt". And that's the problem with most advocates of gun control and changing our laws. Owning weapons isn't for the sole purpose of hunting wild game. Owning weapons, guns especially, allows the people to stand up against tryanny, "both foreign and domestic", and keep control of our country. Because it is OUR country, not the government's.

      Driving up the interstate yesterday, the army national guard was practicing on their one weekend a month and had tanks out, dressed in full combat fatigues, etc. So, civilians don't need automatic weapons, grenades, or RPG's? What if our government decided to use those tanks against us? How would we all feel then? I understand that everyone wants to say, "oh, that will never happen." But I would rather be prepared if and when it ever does happen, than be caught standing around silly with a bowie knife if and when it ever does happen. Furthermore, gun restrictions will only keep the honest men honest, so that when a criminal breaks into your house with an automatic weapon that he/she obtained illegally, you will be sitting there with your knife wondering why you ever obeyed that law.

      July 30, 2012 at 12:45 pm | Reply
    • Billy D

      We're all missing the most important point of this issue and that is that this guy was under a psychiatrist consult. He bought the guns legally; so don't blame gun laws. I think there is a disconnect with his psychiatric care. Same educated people speaking out against gun control and his doctor couldn't determine that he was a looney?!?!?!?! This heinous act shows premediation and a psychiatrist could see this?

      July 30, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Reply
    • Hornacek

      Speaking as the potential innocent bystander who will probably get shot by some civilian trying to kill the gunman and missing, that does not make me feel better.

      July 30, 2012 at 1:06 pm | Reply
    • Recondomoe

      1. They are gun laws on the books that are NOT enforced.

      2. Be for real about the color of the map. What is number of full auto weapons in those light green countries as compared to the United States. Central America, South America, and Africa?

      July 30, 2012 at 1:06 pm | Reply
    • Freedom

      America would not be a free independent country today without an armed citizenry. We swat down any attempt to limit our right o bear arms any anyway. . The lilly liveried liberals that would never defend our country will continue to pick away at ourv2cd amendment rights.. It should not be required thAt the govt know of every firearm you posess..Does anyone believe criminals follow these rules? It just complicates gun ownership for lawabiding citizens.. If you use the liberals way of always equating issues I would equate that because America has the most guns per capita that is why we stand for freedom in the world . A citizenry that if needed can take up arms.

      July 30, 2012 at 1:08 pm | Reply
    • Bfunkie

      One of the Facts that was conveniently left out of this "Fact filled" article was that the majority of gun related deaths are caused by illegally obtained firearms. you can crack down all you want on the average homeowner who wants to protect his house and family, but the hood rats on the streets will still get their guns. And then, when they attempt to hold someone up at gunpoint, the people that should be carrying weapons, won't be able to because they are too difficult to get legally.

      July 30, 2012 at 1:39 pm | Reply
    • PS

      Victims families have the voice after such tragedies to make change. Ask for stricter gun control! Remember the victims, but never forget that today's legal gun owner can become tomorrow's mass murderer! He just needs one bad day! Never forget that this country's Second Amendment needs urgent change! What we do to prevent tragedies is more important than just eulogies and memories! If victims' families also support NRA and guns, then they really do not care for their family members who have fallen to gun violence!

      July 30, 2012 at 2:20 pm | Reply
    • Chris

      Fareed never said it was easy to obtain these weapons he said it has become easier. Things can become easier but still remain difficult. This shouldnt be hard to grasp with or without high education.

      July 30, 2012 at 2:20 pm | Reply
    • Jose Pineda

      You know what? that is the key: madmen with guns. I think I am catching up to the strategy these "lefties" or "so-called-progressives" are using. They probe their environment. They'll send someone like Fareed in CNN who is very articulate, and can come across as reasonable out to "state the fact" as he did in this piece. Then, he'll provide so "reasonable" analysis of those facts. Then those of us who vehemently disagree get all riled up, and post our discontent which they them use to call us idiots, unintelligent,, war mongers, nuts, religious, or whatever they think of us. hmmmm.... not sure what they think they're gaining with that strategy unless they're just trying to distract us from something far worse.

      July 30, 2012 at 2:53 pm | Reply
    • Katherine

      No, dolapoidris, you've got that all wrong. The only thing to stop a man with a gun is to have no guns, at all. It is for illiterate trash like you that our country has met its demise and the world looks at us with disgust and disdain. America is now a great example of the inmates running the assylum.

      July 30, 2012 at 2:55 pm | Reply
      • PS

        Well said Katherine!

        July 30, 2012 at 3:06 pm |
    • AllenS47

      Mr. Zakaria...It's been said time and time again..."Guns don't kill people...people kill people" Sure a gun can be used a fatal weapon, just as knife, a club or even a drunk behind the wheel of a car. Nobody reports how many lives are saved by citizens that use a gun to stop a would be killer. Nobody reports how many crimes have been thwarted by persons legally carrying a weapon. There is a much bigger picture to investigate than simply inferring we need tighter gun control. We need to put more effort into finding the idiots before they strike. What would everyone be saying about guns if a person that happened to be carrying a weapon was at the Aurora, CO theater and shot and killed the assailant before he was able to squeeze the trigger?....Now Mar. Zakaria...you too are a part of the problem. Every time there is a mention of gun control, everyone rushes out to buy even more guns and ammunition. How do you fell about being a contributor to the so called "problem"?

      July 30, 2012 at 3:03 pm | Reply
    • Rob Collins

      Will more laws help? How many laws did this guy break? One that immediately comes to mind is the restriction on firearm possession by the mentally ill. It's easy to blame the object (a SEMI auto firearm, or a PUMP action shotgun) but, both this shooting and the Virginia Tech shooting were carried out by mentally ill individuals. (although this recent one was seeing a psychiatrist, for some reason, apparently the government isn't responsible for validating mental status even though they legislate based on it)

      How come no one's clued in to this? There are plenty of deranged folks popping off about the 2nd ammendment rights, what about making the laws ALREADY ON THE BOOKS work?

      Now we can go back to arguing amongst ourselves based on Fareed's lack of familiariity with anything to do with this issue and the bias shown in the article.

      July 30, 2012 at 5:35 pm | Reply
    • T. Shane

      Fareed told us that we do not have a right to our own facts so I decided to take a look at the facts according to annual FBI data. Fareed reported that although violent crime has fallen significantly since 2000, "...guns are the exception. Gun homicide rates haven’t improved at all. They were at roughly the same levels in 2009 as they were in 2000." These statements are all true, but why stop at 2009 when these data are available for 2010? The murder-by-firearm rate is over 5.8% lower in 2010 than in 2000. Obviously, comparing two years means very little, although this is what Fareed chose to do. A more relevant statement would be to say that for the past ten years, murder rates by firearms have remained around 3 per 100,000 citizens. This is true in spite of very significant changes in the law that have made it easier for people to purchase (instant background checks) and carry firearms. This is true even though the so-called "assault weapons" ban expired in 2004. This is true even though we've been through very tough economic times in the past few years. Are these factors not worthy of consideration? Another point to consider: If there really are 88 guns per 100 Americans as Fareed tells us – if we really are the nation with the greatest number of guns per civilian – then doesn't such a low average of about 3 firearm murders per 100,000 speak quite highly of our nation? According to a Harvard Law study examining murder rates and private gun ownership in Europe, we see that significant numbers of Europeans do manage to murder with far fewer firearms. Luxembourg,the second richest country per capita (behind Qatar), had a 2002 murder rate of over 9 per 100,000. The number of average firearms per citizen in Luxembourg is 0 – and handguns are entirely banned. Nevertheless, Luxembourgers managed a murder rate nearly 3 times higher than our firearms murder rate and 161% of our overall murder rate. Other countries show less dramatic numbers but, interestingly, Luxembourg is the only country in the study with almost no firearms in civilian hands. It is tragic when any innocent civilian is murdered by a firearm or otherwise, yet if we were to compare our murder rate per 100,000 ARMED civilians, I think we would discover that our citizens are really quite responsible with this very unique right to keep and bear arms. Since Fareed's job is to give a global perspective, these points should have been discussed. Most importantly, I think, Fareed should consider the democratic record of the United States. Perhaps he should show us a map of countries that have had two centuries of civilian rule, uninterrupted by dictatorship. I bet it would show a very strong and direct correlation to the country with the most guns per civilian.

      July 30, 2012 at 6:23 pm | Reply
    • Traintime

      The Government of the United States should have NEVER, NEVER,NEVER have let Military Weapons get into the hands of
      Civilians, starting in the 1950s.
      These include all Variations of Any Military Weapon, The Arms Manufacturers made a Fortune Selling these Weapons to
      The Civilian Market,
      As usual, Money, Money, Money is always at the Root of all our Problems

      July 30, 2012 at 7:09 pm | Reply
    • Ken Margo

      The problem with your logic is that suppose another individual shoots at the perpetrator, hits and kills someone else. Is that a freebee? Is that ok? The argument that having a gun will help protect you doesn't make sense when you consider cops get shot too. Everyone knows they have a gun and it didn't prevent them from being shot.

      July 31, 2012 at 12:10 am | Reply
      • The Devil's Duo

        Your argument is silly. Police Officers have guns but still get shot. Noone made the argument that having a gun will ensure that you will never get shot yourself. Having a gun will provide you with the ability to protect yourself when and if needed or possible.

        July 31, 2012 at 9:31 am |
    • @mangler

      Let's not forget to ban aircraft, gasoline, diesel and fertilizer along with guns. While we're at it automobiles, smoking and going out in the sun.

      July 31, 2012 at 3:14 am | Reply
    • Jeff

      So, with so many guns...... What do the numbers, comparative for each country, look like when it comes to number of deaths by firearms..... PER GUN?

      July 31, 2012 at 10:22 am | Reply
    • Liviu

      the problem is that in today's America you can't be an elected politician and be for gun control laws..

      July 31, 2012 at 4:04 pm | Reply
    • melvinslizard

      You can't save everyone, Fareed, you can only hope to not be living next door when they go off.

      July 31, 2012 at 4:06 pm | Reply
    • Kikaider

      And BTW: Assault Rifles are rifles equipped with a select fire switch, fully capable of Automatic fire.
      NO Semi-Automatic rifle is an Assault Rifle. PERIOD.
      No matter how 'tactical' it looks.

      July 31, 2012 at 4:21 pm | Reply
    • jheron

      Well then don't let Madmen have guns.

      July 31, 2012 at 6:32 pm | Reply
    • Grady

      Of course the madman wouldn't have a gun to begin with, that's the whole point....

      July 31, 2012 at 7:41 pm | Reply
    • denim

      Nah, there are other ways to stop a crazy person with a gun. A knife in the back is one. Hammer to the head is another. Crowbar to the arm and/or kick to the back of the knee, are others.

      July 31, 2012 at 10:01 pm | Reply
    • Avijit

      Guns saves lives. Buy more guns. They cure other people's hemorrhoids, headaches, arthritis, anxiety and depression once and forever.

      The same kind of articles will be repeated when there will be another similar incident or story of a school kid caught with a gun in the schoolbag. Same kind of arguments will be posted for and against gun laws. Let some city or county put up strict gun laws for a period; may be 2-4 years, then monitor the effect on crime pattern. If results return positive, others can follow. If not, then one can buy more guns and imitate Clint Eastwood's movie styles.

      If guns make one feel safe then carrying a RPG might make feel more secure.

      August 1, 2012 at 9:06 am | Reply
    • Eddie

      Fareed Zakaria -> Are you serious with this story? Do you not understand the criminals don't care what the law states? Are you really that naive? Maybe the Aurora shooter didn't see the no gun sign! Had he seen it, he OBVIOUSLY would have turned around and went back home. Stop defending psychopaths hell bent on hurting other people. If it wasn't a gun it would've been another tool – let's ban swords, then knifes, then let's ban poisonous chemicals. Just because you simply don't understand gun owners doesn't allow you to make sweeping generalizations about them.

      August 1, 2012 at 7:06 pm | Reply
    • Francisco

      Fareed Zakaria , Statistics can be a bit misleading, do you feel safer in the US compared to some of the light green countries? I believe I feel safer here than in most of those countries where only the government and criminals have access to guns. At least I know I can defend my home from criminals, but if that right is taken away.......

      August 1, 2012 at 10:19 pm | Reply
    • Alex

      I agree. The right to bear arms is a right. Even if laws are made tougher, pathological people will still pose a threat. After all, they dont respect any laws.

      August 2, 2012 at 3:37 am | Reply
    • Paulo


      August 2, 2012 at 7:32 pm | Reply
    • sapphire

      This is the land of the free and responsible gun ownership is our ultimate insurance against tyranny. We've given up so much freedom already in exchange for false security (TSA, Homeland Security, Patriot Act, etc). Citizen ownership of firearms isn't the problem nor the type and number of firearms. So we have more guns and by your own statistics, less crime. As to the gun crime statistics, how many of those were committed by individuals with long rap sheets and stolen or unregistered firearms ? Our system is far from perfect but like it or not, guns are part of our heritage and always will be. Your simple minded analysis and lack of research holds no weight.

      August 3, 2012 at 11:22 pm | Reply
    • Awesomesauce

      Fareed points out that as laws have become LESS restrictive for legal gun ownership, the U.S. has become safer as shown by dropping crime rates and all this while the gun related deaths stayed flat. I'm glad he told me about that. Sounds like if we increase gun control, crime rates will climb and the U.S. will become less safe. Thank you Fareed!

      August 10, 2012 at 12:52 pm | Reply
    • Greg

      Removing gun in America will never happen nor should it!!! I has been our founded 2nd Amendment Right! It is what keeps Americans free from the rest of the World and a legal gun owner should remain exactly that , a free person with a legal right to bear arms..

      December 9, 2012 at 11:37 am | Reply
    • Jesper


      Me and my wife offen go to US on vacattion – and we love it.

      However – based on all the incidents with cracy gun US owners – how do we protect ourself.

      I am a gun owner myself here in Denmark and trained on heavy powered rifles and hand guns – and fully able to protect myself and my wife if allowed to.

      However as a tourist I not allowed to carrry a gun although I am one of the good gays.

      Should I stay away or do you allow me to protect myself?


      December 26, 2012 at 3:58 pm | Reply
  2. Stephanie

    Fareed, I have also heard these facts: Switzerland's government issues a gun to every adult and trains them how to use it. Switzerland has the lowest gun-related crime of any civilized country. Or this: The average police response time in America is SIX MINUTES, whereas the average draw-and-shoot response for a lawful concealed carry weapons holder is FIVE SECONDS. Or how about this: lawful people obey gun control laws but criminals don't. Granted, some experts agree that gun control really works; experts, such as Adolf Hitler, Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung, Muammar Qaddafi, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Kim Jung-II, and....President Obama! Yeah, thanks for your facts, but as you presented them, you're looking like a tool for those who are trying to spread propaganda for those who wish to disarm this country. Personally, I'll heed the warnings of those who have already been disarmed:https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=fGaDAThOHhA

    July 27, 2012 at 5:25 pm | Reply
    • truthbringsfreedom

      @Stephanie: Nice quote about Switzerland, but you forgot the part about the ammunition: Prior to 2007 members of the Swiss Militia were supplied with 50 rounds of ammunition for their military weapon in a sealed ammo box that was regularly audited by the government. This was so that, in the case of an emergency, the militia could respond quickly. However, since 2007 this practice has been discontinued. Only 2,000 specialist militia members (who protect airports and other sites of particular sensitivity) are permitted to keep their military ammunition at home. The rest of the militia can only get their ammunition from their military armory in the event of an emergency. It is possible to go shooting with minimal supervision and without an id-check, however *all ammunition* must be used while on the range.

      So I guess you would be willing to let the government keep all your ammo, otherwise your implied argument falls apart.

      July 27, 2012 at 5:54 pm | Reply
      • Ken

        While it was interesting reading your reply to Stephanie, perhaps YOU should consider all the facts; The weapons that are issued are a standard .223 nato round. Individuals ARE allowed to purchase their own ammunition, and do so. The fact that the ammo was limited had nothing to do with the idea that someone would go haywire, but rather it was a result of budgetary constraints and the general populous should not have to carry the cost if another citizen wishes to shoot a lot.

        July 27, 2012 at 7:18 pm |
      • truthbringsfreedom

        Perhaps YOU should read more carefully. Ammo can be bought unregistered at government subsidized shooting ranges, but, by law, must all be used at the range. You can't take unregistered ammo home. They don't just let you walk into a store, buy ammo, and go home.

        July 27, 2012 at 7:37 pm |
      • zippy

        Again.... Guns do NOT kill people. It is the EVIL MORONS out in society who decide they should kill someone. A criminal would use a stick to kill if he had to, a gun is more convenient, but that does not mean that we should get rid of our rights as set forth in The Bill of Rights. We are obligated to keep and bear arms so as NOT to be taken over by another foreign power. By the way comparing The United States of America with Switzerland is like comparing apples to rocks. Those people don't even fight in wars. The ONLY reason why our country has not been taken over is because a foreign power knows that not only would they have to get past the military, but they would also have to get by the citizens because we have the right to keep and bear arms. What about Bows and Arrows, they can kill people, so we should ban those also. Lets not forget that a club can be used to bash in a persons head, maybe we should ban trees. You could take a piece of rope and hang someone, we probably should ban all of that nasty rope. Knives are no good for anything but killing people, I think we need "knife control" also in this country. Do you see how absurd it gets to be??

        July 29, 2012 at 10:51 am |
    • sevenseas

      Funny that you only address one part of Stephanie's argument, and call the whole thing wrong. Do you concede that the other parts are true?

      July 27, 2012 at 6:09 pm | Reply
      • truthbringsfreedom

        If @Staphanie actually had any other arguments I would have responded, but try these:
        1) "The average police response time in America is SIX MINUTES, whereas the average draw-and-shoot response for a lawful concealed carry weapons holder is FIVE SECONDS" This is an argument? What is it saying? How many crimes have been prevented by concealed carry, how many lives saved, how many lost because someone was conceal carrying? Got any facts to discuss or am I supposed to respond to a no content sound bite?
        2) "Or how about this: lawful people obey gun control laws but criminals don't." How about: "people are lawful until they aren't." Again, nothing was said but a tautology, which is not worth discussing.
        3) Stalin handed out a lot of guns to the young men of Russia, so using the "Switerland argument", Stalin was a pro-gun kind of guy. Those young men stopped the Nazi criminals from taking Russia from the Russians thanks to the guns Papa Joe gave to his people. Stupid argument I know, but listing a bunch of tyrants as a supposed argument is stupid too...and listing President Obama with those guys is an insult to Obama and to America.

        July 27, 2012 at 7:06 pm |
      • Doug

        @ truthbringsfreedom
        Stephanie is right, but if you're too lazy to try and inform yourself then please allow me to be your enabler.

        According to the FBI, during the first year of the Obama administration the national murder rate declined by 7.4% along with other categories of crime which fell by significant percentages. During that same time national gun sales increased dramatically. According to Mr. Lott 450,000 more people bought guns in November 2008 than November 2007 which represents a 40% increase in sales, a trend which continued throughout 2009. The drop in the murder rate was the biggest one-year drop since 1999, another year when gun sales soared in the wake of increased calls for gun control as a result of the Columbine shooting.

        In reporting on the only independently refereed study on firearms to be verified and validated, economist John Lott's original analysis by The Chronicle of Higher Education said that although his findings are controversial "Mr. Lott's research has convinced his peers of at least one point: No scholars now claim that legalizing concealed weapons causes an increase in crime."

        From May 2007 through the end of 2009, concealed carry permit holders in the U.S. have killed at least 117 individuals, including 9 law enforcement officers. There were about 25,000 murders by firearm that period, which means that concealed carry permit holders committed less than 1% of the murders by firearm.

        According to the FBI, the vast majority of defensive gun uses (DGUs) do not involve killing or even wounding an attacker, with government surveys showing 108,000 to 23 million DGUs per year, with ten private national surveys showing 764,000 to 3.6 million DGU per year. That averages over 1 million instances where lawful gun owners protected themselves. frequently without ever firing a shot.

        Additional Info:
        David E. Olson, Loyola University Chicago, and Michael D. Maltz, University of Illinois at Chicago, "Right-to-carry concealed weapons laws and homicide in large U.S. counties: the effect on weapon types, victim characteristics, and victim-offender relationships," The Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001. They found "a decrease in total homicides."


        August 11, 2012 at 3:34 pm |
      • Doug

        "People are lawful until they aren't."
        It's extraordinarily rare that a concealed carrier will suddenly become unlawful. As noted above: less than 1%. Even still, as long as there are other lawful people around, they would immediately stop the converted unlawful individual. I know you'll disagree, but concealed carry is a self-correcting principle. It's just how it is whether you agree or not.

        True. Not much can be said about tyrants past. It's the tyrants to-be that we need to be vigilant of. Regardless, you DID illustrate our point in Stalin giving his people guns to fight Nazi criminals. At least you do recognize the effectiveness of an armed populace in preventing lawlessness actions (even if it comes from their own ranks)

        August 11, 2012 at 3:35 pm |
      • Doug

        independently refereed study on firearms to be verified and validated, economist John Lott's..............

        I forgot to include the name of the study: "More Guns, Less Crime" by economist John Lott. Please feel free to read into it......though I doubt you will.

        August 11, 2012 at 3:38 pm |
    • John Stevens

      Sorry Stephanie, but you're flat out wrong about Switzerland having the lowest gun crime rate. Nowhere near: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

      July 27, 2012 at 6:35 pm | Reply
      • jay p

        7000 times a day americans use personal weapons to prevent crime or defend themself. you don't hear about those. even the clinton admin admitted to 1.5 million times a year. approx 8500 persons die each year in the u.s. due to personal weapons.?
        in criminal situations. over thirty thousand die in vehicle accidents. should we take cars away first?

        July 27, 2012 at 10:16 pm |
      • tom

        We should not be looking at other countries and drawing conclusions from how much violence they have vs. us. There are just too many factors involved (culture, social issues, demographics, history, etc.) to extract out one variable (eg. gun availability) and draw a meaningful conclusion from it.

        July 28, 2012 at 10:44 am |
    • pbernasc

      so stupid you are Stephanie.
      IN Switzerland you can buy a hand gun only after you have proven to the gun control office that you need it, and guess what, self defense is not considered a valid reason.
      Yes thew armed forces give an assault rife to each serving man in the armed forces .. but they also screen them for psychological wroth .. if you are not healthy, you do not get a gun in Switzerland

      Now n the US if you are not healthy, not only you get a gu,m but you also get to kill people and get away with it

      July 27, 2012 at 7:16 pm | Reply
      • Billy D

        pbernasc, guess that blows your comment, the assailant was under psychiatric care at the time of the shooting.

        July 30, 2012 at 1:02 pm |
    • flip

      First off this Swiss are trained in weapony, as members of a standing militia-the land of Heidi doesn't have a standing army, and most citizens are members of that militia.
      Secondly, you really want to trust the average Joe Six Pac taking the place of trained Law Enforcement. OK, then go live where there are no cops, and law and order is kept by a trigger happy populace.

      July 27, 2012 at 7:45 pm | Reply
      • Joe D

        Actually, the percentage of "bad" shootings by concealed carry permit holders is much lower than that of police officers. They are not particularly fond of that fact, by the way.

        July 28, 2012 at 1:16 am |
    • tim c

      Steph, no on could have written it better!!! This guy has his facts all wrong, worse, has no concept of what the second amendment is all about ad how the majority of gun owner are responsible people

      July 27, 2012 at 8:07 pm | Reply
      • dr1776

        People seem to have a diminishing sense of history. The second amendment was not meant for hunting. Do they not teach history in school anymore. All your rights are ensured by the threat of arms, not by the U.S. Government. This lesson was learned long and hard through-out history.

        July 29, 2012 at 9:27 am |
    • Jerome Green

      Well Said! Well said indeed!

      July 27, 2012 at 8:11 pm | Reply
    • RasPutin

      Dear, ignorant Steph:
      Hitler and the Nazis actually repealed laws on citizens gun rights. Under the 1938 gun law all restrictions on ownership of long guns were removed. So much for tyrants seizing guns.

      July 27, 2012 at 8:50 pm | Reply
    • Pat Heaneey

      Stephanie, you left Mitt Romney off the pro guy control list. He signed an assault weapons ban into law.

      July 28, 2012 at 6:02 pm | Reply
    • scott bleyle

      It is mandatory for Swiss citizens to maintain proficiency and function of select fire (full auto) military grade shoulder weapon in each household and they have never been dominated by any other country,including Nazi Germany.This is how they maintain their "neutral" status.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:14 pm | Reply
      • coinfiender

        And you believe with terrorism, this will last long? No one is neutral anymore, you're good or evil.

        July 29, 2012 at 12:50 pm |
    • coinfiender

      Very well said!

      July 29, 2012 at 12:47 pm | Reply
    • Chris

      Stephanie, you'll like this graph. It shows that no we are not the country with the most per capita. Another lie from the media saying we are the deadliest Country. http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/28/guns-ownership-around-the-world-graphic/

      July 30, 2012 at 2:59 pm | Reply
    • Jose Pineda

      Hey Stephanie: you forgot another expert: Hugo Chavez. In response to an overwhelming crime rate that plagues certain sectors in Venezuela, he's proposing to disarm the population. Apparently he's counting on criminals giving up their guns. Of course, the population is so fed up that they might just accept this. Needles to say, from the outside is easy to see what Chavez is doing in following the standard model for totalitarian regimes, and neutrilizing or diminishing potential armed resistance to the revolution.

      July 30, 2012 at 2:59 pm | Reply
  3. Beatbox

    What are you talking about? Homicides committed with firearms have fallen as the homicide rate as a whole has fallen. You are way off.

    July 27, 2012 at 5:27 pm | Reply
    • Bernard

      I am largely respectful of Zakaria, and still am despite my strong disagreement of this.

      However it should be pointed out that it has NOT been easier to get automatic weapons: those have and still are highly restricted to mostly Class III FFL holders since 1986. Of all of the regulations we had during the AWB, automatic weapons was not the common theme, it was semi-automatic weapons that to the Hollywood trained eye looked like they could be automatic because they were black looking.

      Violent crime as overall been decreasing in this country, and shootouts have occured in other nations. Norway had the worst, and that nation has one of the toughest gun control laws in the nation. It's their nations responsibility to secure their trade borders, and that is certainly easier to do there than in the United States where border security is a much more serious issue. London too had a mass shooting leaving 12 dead just 2 years ago, and that wasn't with a semi-auto rifle.

      In fact, semi-auto rifles have the lowest lethal % rate in illegal shootings. Pistols are the highest.

      It's not good to look at the issue of gun violence alone, its a matter of looking at overall violence, both successful and attempted and then look at guns as both a catalyst and preventive force in a region by region basis. Within the country, there is a fairly decent correlation to gun rights leading to safer communities in regards to CCW presense, and other gun purchases.

      Semi-auto rifles are only 0.5% of all gun deaths. You honestly need to be dozens of times more afraid that the asprin you take for your headache will kill you than a .223 round from another Holmes, Loughner, or Cho.

      July 27, 2012 at 6:07 pm | Reply
      • John Stevens

        This really frustrates me – people pull out isolated incidents of gun violence from other countries and somehow think this proves gun control doesn't work. No gun control advocate argues that strict controls in other countries works 100%. But the overall figures for each country speak for themselves.

        July 27, 2012 at 6:44 pm |
      • flip

        Go ahead argue till your fingers get numb; one thing is always true, if guns weren't as available as they are, JH would have had to resort to throwing popcorn balls at the audience.

        July 27, 2012 at 7:48 pm |
      • sevenseas

        "Go ahead argue till your fingers get numb; one thing is always true, if guns weren't as available as they are, JH would have had to resort to throwing popcorn balls at the audience."

        Or he may have used some of the explosive devices he made, and killed everyone in the theater.

        July 27, 2012 at 8:05 pm |
      • RasPutin

        Two items:
        I am not worried about being shot by a madman – I am outraged that a madman can legally get hold of enough firepower to kill a dozen innocent civilians, including women and children!
        I am also outraged that an organization (NRA) that 'says' it is patriotic fights any attempt to keep killing machinery like handguns and assault rifles restricted, just so its funders (the gun makers and sellers) can maximize profits.

        July 27, 2012 at 9:00 pm |
      • Lance Stoff

        @flip. no Flip, as determined as he was it would have probably been home made pipe bombs. nice thought huh?

        July 28, 2012 at 11:14 am |
      • scott bleyle

        gun violence doesn't even make the "top ten" causes of death in the U.S. Yasser Arafat accepted the Nobel Peace Prize while he had a .357magnum tucked under his man dress.

        July 29, 2012 at 12:25 pm |
    • scott bleyle

      In the U.K. knife crimes have escalated,bet the law on that will be draconian.

      July 29, 2012 at 12:16 pm | Reply
      • coinfiender

        At Scott....Very well put. You can take every weapon you can think of away from man. A violent person will be just that. How many people have been beaten by baseball bats, or bricks, or rocks? So should we outlaw baseball and building materials? Take one weapon away, they will find another "Former Police Officer" said it best "pretty soon we'll be eating steaks with plastic forks and riding bikes to work." But then again, you can make a pretty nasty shank out of melted plastic, and bicycle parts." Just watch Lock Up Raw.....

        July 29, 2012 at 1:02 pm |
  4. JAL

    I defer to comedian Chris Rock on gun control.

    July 27, 2012 at 5:28 pm | Reply
    • BaltoPaul

      If you defer to Chris Rock on anything, you're the comedian.

      July 28, 2012 at 2:04 am | Reply
      • scott bleyle

        some people depend on others for their safety

        July 29, 2012 at 12:18 pm |
  5. Darrell W.

    Mr. Zakaria, You make perfectly good sense. Outlaw private gun ownership and the criminals won't buy or steal any because that would be against the law. Thank you so much! Such insight!

    July 27, 2012 at 5:57 pm | Reply
    • History Bear

      Sarcasm doesn't bother Z or his ilk because they are convinced of their own rightness and that they truly know better than anyone else.

      July 27, 2012 at 6:16 pm | Reply
    • sevenseas

      "Sarcasm doesn't bother Z or his ilk because they are convinced of their own rightness and that they truly know better than anyone else."

      True, that is what makes zealots so dangerous.

      July 27, 2012 at 6:38 pm | Reply
    • flip

      If we stopped coddleing convicted violent criminals with weight rooms, flat screen TVs, and three hots and a cot, along with life time health care, then maybe they would think twice.

      July 27, 2012 at 7:51 pm | Reply
      • sevenseas

        On this we both agree

        July 27, 2012 at 8:05 pm |
      • Raven223

        If it's such a great deal why don't you go and apply for it? Prison may be many things, but coddling isn't one of them. Even in the minimum security prisons you have to keep your head on a swivel or you'll lose it.

        July 27, 2012 at 11:59 pm |
    • nkakismet

      Your sarcasm is not even based on fact and your logic is flawed. Gun control will help because a number of gun crimes committed are people who either do not have a past record or have some kind of mental imbalance.
      By your logic every illegal activity should be legalized because criminals cannot be controlled anyway and will find a way around it, so why bother.
      The fact is that gun control works elsewhere. Even in more violent societies like South Asia the fatalities in gun related incidents are lower – well because there are not enough guns in people's hands.
      Hiding behind an outdated amendment of which even lawyers cannot agree on the actual intent is misguided at best.
      Look at the above map America, please!

      July 29, 2012 at 4:20 pm | Reply
      • Billy D

        The US outlawed alcohol in the 30’s and 40‘s and that only made the Kennedy’s rich men.

        July 30, 2012 at 1:10 pm |
  6. sevenseas

    "We cannot change the tortured psychology of madmen like James Holmes. What we can do is change our gun laws."

    What gun laws could have been changed to stop him? He planned the attack out for months, he had no previous criminal or psych record, and he demonstrated a clear knowledge of constructing explosive devices. In fact, one of the big reasons the body count was not higher is that he used a hi capacity magazine, which are prone to jamming. He chose a gun free zone, knowing that law abiding citizens would not be armed.

    Personally I think it is more than a little disgusting that you would use the deaths of the people in Aurora to push to limit the rights of US Citizens. Much like Senator Schumer, who slipped a magazine ban in the cyber security bill. As for your "facts" the chart you refer to does not show population density of the respective states, thus is nothing more than propaganda. Nor does it show overall crime statistics, and the correlation between gun laws and crime rates.

    Just another example of how the 4th estate has been destroyed

    July 27, 2012 at 6:04 pm | Reply
    • amphiox

      What gun laws? How about a restriction on expanded ammo clips?

      July 27, 2012 at 7:49 pm | Reply
      • flip

        Oh, please anything but that!

        July 27, 2012 at 7:52 pm |
      • sevenseas

        Actually, the drum magazine jamming the rifle meant the body count was less than it would have been if he had been carrying multiple 10 round magazines. Anyone who has used these magazines, will attest to how unreliable they are. I have one I use for a bench rifle, since the weight keeps the rifle more stable when I go the range, but I would never use it if my life depended on it since it jams 1 out of every 7 or 8 rounds consistently.

        Had he brought any of his home made explosives or brought quite a few low round magazines (if the scary expanded magazines had not been available) I would say there would have been many more deaths.

        July 27, 2012 at 8:04 pm |
  7. spectraprism

    I do not think you can assume nutcases are equally dispersed throughout these countries. I think what you can assume is that we alone are a country that says it prides itself on its individualism. I think most of Europe and especially Asia prides itself on family and community ties. We do not. Most of Europe truly believes in taking care of its more vulnerable citizens. We do not. We are a country all about individualism, and I do believe it affects some people mentally and emotionally. Combine that with 300,000,000 guns here with the strain of sink or swim by yourself, and they don;t mix really well.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:06 pm | Reply
    • Raven223

      Also include that America shows more violent shows in a week than most other countries show in a year. Our hollywood culture glorifies violence yet when the violence comes off the screen we shudder in horror. When a culture feeds its brain violence one should not be surprised to find a violent culture.

      July 27, 2012 at 11:31 pm | Reply
  8. Edward Current

    Let's do an experiment. For one year, let's make all kinds of guns cheap and easy to obtain. Make it so anyone can go into Wal-Mart and by a fully automatic machine gun with 1,000 rounds or a missile launcher. No waiting period, no background check. But you have to be at least 18 years old (I mean come on, there have to be some regulations). This is basically the NRA's wet dream.

    Then, see what happens over the course of the year. Will America be safer?

    July 27, 2012 at 6:09 pm | Reply
    • sevenseas

      Can you cite where the NRA has said it wants this? Or is Alinsky's 9th rule the only way you know to debate?

      July 27, 2012 at 6:11 pm | Reply
    • Ryan

      That's pretty much how it is now, so probably nothing would happen in your little 'experiment'. I don't think if Colorado banned all hand guns, James Holmes wouldn't have done what he did any how.

      July 27, 2012 at 6:28 pm | Reply
    • flip

      Lets make our congressmen walk to work, and back in the late evening to a parking lot about 10 blocks from the Capitol. Who's ever left after six months can vote on lifting restrictions on assualt weapons.

      July 27, 2012 at 7:55 pm | Reply
      • sevenseas

        On this we agree as well. But can we make all the lawyers do the same?

        July 27, 2012 at 8:07 pm |
    • Libertyrose

      Hah, guns don't protect people. People protect people.

      July 27, 2012 at 11:24 pm | Reply
      • sevenseas

        Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who didn't

        July 27, 2012 at 11:53 pm |
    • BaltoPaul

      Or we could just neuter all the idiots, and everything would be better in one generation. Your day is next Tuesday.

      July 28, 2012 at 2:06 am | Reply
      • Michael

        You first Paul.

        July 29, 2012 at 1:49 pm |
  9. Phoenix

    Well presented, Fareed, but when it comes to gun supporters in the US, you are dealing wth people who have made up thier minds and will not allow thenselves to be confused with the facts.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:09 pm | Reply
    • sevenseas

      Much like gun control supporters eh?

      July 27, 2012 at 6:12 pm | Reply
    • nina

      Go ahead, tell us the facts.

      July 27, 2012 at 8:11 pm | Reply
    • BaltoPaul

      Well presented? He invented most of his data, or found it with random google searches. He'd get a "D" if he turned this in as homework in most high schools.

      July 28, 2012 at 2:07 am | Reply
  10. martin alianelli

    We Americans are gun happy. God gave us guns and the law recognizes our right to bear guns. But times have changed; we need to take the blinders off and effect sensible changes. First, tighten-up access to guns making sure that only law-abiding citizens have free access in specially designated outlets, e.g., no gun shows! Second, design rigorous training to include much more than the usual 2-hour course on gun safety mandated in some states. And as corny as it sounds, it is true, guns don’t kill people!

    July 27, 2012 at 6:09 pm | Reply
    • sevenseas

      Ever been to a gun show? Everyone I have been to requires the same background check I get when I buy from a gun store. If you wish to impose these requirements on one civil right, do you support them being added to another? I hope so, since you are creating precedent that any right can be treated as such.

      July 27, 2012 at 6:15 pm | Reply
    • Ryan

      If we enacted what you just suggested, James Holmes still would have been able to do what he did, you realize that, right?

      July 27, 2012 at 6:24 pm | Reply
    • Joe D

      If you buy a gun at a gun show you fill out the same paperwork as you do at a gun shop or any other retailer that sells firearms. In our state you must either have a handgun purchase permit which requires a background check or you must wait for the background check to go through before taking possession of the firearm. Lying on the transfer of ownership form is a federal offense. The "gun show" argument does not hold water if you have ever been to one, but that does not seem to stop liberal writers or politicians from spouting off whatever they please.

      July 28, 2012 at 1:26 am | Reply
    • Jean Sartre

      God didn't give us guns... MAN created GOD... go figure...

      July 28, 2012 at 3:58 pm | Reply
  11. Mr Crown

    Mr. Zakaria continues to beat the liberal book of revelation. Of all people, Mr. Zakaria has really no excuse for such ignorance. In the third world, a LOT more people die from violence than the US. Its simply not reported and thus is not in the statistics. Mr. Zakaria hails from India where communal violence, road accidents and plain thuggery kills many.

    If you want to be taken seriously, sir, think through before you keep spouting your liberal rhetoric in the name of "facts".

    July 27, 2012 at 6:10 pm | Reply
  12. 22X Richer

    Crime in the US is down, according to the FBI, not up. Polls mean nothing because they are based on feelings not facts.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:10 pm | Reply
  13. Greg

    Fareed, you forgot to put up the graphs that show murder rates. For example, Brazil, which has tight gun control and lower per-capita gun ownership has over 4 times the US murder rate. I guess that fact slipped your mind, or undermines your argument. So much for pesky things like facts.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:11 pm | Reply
  14. Bob

    Being able to buy and have guns might be a right as US citizen, but it protects only yourself. Banning guns totally could protect a whole society. The problem in Colorado is that there is not control at all, no registration is required, no laws against carrying weapons or keeping them in your car. This shooter was able to purchase several guns and 6000(!) rounds without being detected by authorities. This is a major problem that has nothing to do with individual rights and protection. Getting this registration and getting a license (like a driver's license, nobody complains about requiring a driving license) should be standard practice in all states. That way criminals and crazy people will not be able to legally get weapons, while honest citizens will be able to get a weapon for their own protection. That said, I have never fired a weapon myself, and have not desire to.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:14 pm | Reply
    • sevenseas

      In Aurora it is illegal to carry a firearm, might want to look at the actual laws before ranting. As to the 6000 rounds, were the authorities alerted when you bought your car? If not they should have been, the day after the Aurora shooting 13 people were killed by an illegal alien driving a overloaded pickup truck (21 people in it) in Texas. Should we not classify certain vehicles as assault vehicles since more than twice as many people are killed by auto accidents every year. Could James Holmes have shot anyone if he had to use public transportation? Blaming a inanimate object for someone's use of it makes no sense. Just as punishing over 56 million gun owners for the actions of a few is no more than a type of discrimination. After we were urged not to judge the actions of all Muslims due to the actions of a few, should not US citizens who own guns get the same consideration?

      July 27, 2012 at 6:23 pm | Reply
    • Darrell W.

      "That way criminals and crazy people will not be able to legally get weapons,"

      Respectfully Bob, Do you seriously beileve the criminal is concerned if his weapon is purchased/stolen legally or illegally? I mean seriously Bob.

      July 27, 2012 at 6:32 pm | Reply
      • Raven223

        I do, but I'm probably an aberration. I'm a convicted felon, but don't try to get a firearm illegally. Odd thing is I know where I could acquire more than a few for a wink and a nod. Ban them if you want, but it will have the same effect as it does in Mexico where it's illegal to own a firearm with a military caliber (5.56 Nato, 9mm Parabellum, 7.62mm Nato.) If you've been keeping up with Mexican news you know that drug gangs are shooting the place up and beheading people by the dozens using military caliber rifles and handguns.

        July 27, 2012 at 11:43 pm |
    • Alaskan4Life

      How many criminals and nutcases out there actually purchase their weapons leagally? This one in CO may have but I'm willing to bet that a majority of guns used in violent crimes were not purchased from a gun show or sporting goods store but from theh back of some guys van down by the river...

      July 27, 2012 at 7:47 pm | Reply
    • N8ivtxn

      Bob, you said it all right there. You are assuming that criminals are going to obey gun laws. That's why they are called criminals. They break the laws. To echo what many other commenters have said, this guy was going to kill a lot of people any way he could. We hear about one guy inflicting so much horror, yet we never hear about the millionis of gun owners who never kill anyone, or the countless times that the mere act of pulling a firearm stops a crime. I got to the Luby's massacre five minutes after the shooting stopped. I can tell you, had there been three or four TRAINED Individuals in that place, it wouldn't have been near the carnage it was. I have had guns all of my life, and they have never killed anyone.

      In society, like in the animal kingdon, the predators go after the weakest members or those who can't defend themselves. Take a look at the per capita homicide and violent crime rates and you will see that the places that have more gun control have teh higher crime rates because the people that follow the laws are the ones that will turn in their guns and when something happens call 911 (or dial a prayer. same thing) while the predators have a field day. The only to protect against superior strength and numbers is with an equalizer. They don't play by anyone's rules. You have to play by theirs.

      July 28, 2012 at 3:21 pm | Reply
    • ken

      If someone is bigger, stronger has a knife and is going to murder you ,You would be more than glad society is able to defend itself with a gun.

      July 29, 2012 at 10:01 pm | Reply
  15. History Bear

    part of the problem is cultural. We were a frontier society and in many ways still have that mentality. Part because we glorify violence in our sports and entertainment. The other part is if a government doesn't trust it's citizens to be armed the citizens shouldn't trust the government. To all those who argue that we ned to civilize our selves and trust the police I say- bettered to be tried by 12 than carried by 6- and remember, in this country the law is on the side of the criminal, not the victim.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:15 pm | Reply
  16. Carl M

    Lies, damned Lies and Statistics.
    If you want to throw around statistics... 35,000 + people die each year in the US in automobile accidents.
    Should we then ban cars as being too dangerous?

    July 27, 2012 at 6:15 pm | Reply
    • kow dang

      People die in bed. So don't ever go to sleep, then.

      July 29, 2012 at 3:32 am | Reply
  17. Ryan

    Nice survey, I think it's a little odd that you used a survey the UN took five years ago to spread your propaganda seeings how they are in a meeting as we speak to try to take our guns away from us. So far, from what I've researched your 'facts' are seriously misguided or plain wrong.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:17 pm | Reply
  18. Cap

    Taco Bell and twinkies kill more Americans than guns each year. Let's ban those first.

    You can have my chalupa when you pry it from my cold, greasy fingers.........

    July 27, 2012 at 6:19 pm | Reply
    • Hippocrates

      The latest issue of Consumer Reports has a study that shows 180,000 people a year die from mistakes in hospitals and by doctors. Using Fareed's logic, we should get rid of doctors and hospitals. It's a shame his well thought out (snicker.. snicker) screed should include some statistics on all the crimes and murders that were prevented due to a well armed citizenry.

      July 27, 2012 at 8:20 pm | Reply
      • Pat Heaneey

        Wow, talk about poorly thought out... The doctors aren't going out to kill people while the murderers with guns are looking to kill. Please don't drink and post.

        July 28, 2012 at 6:06 pm |
  19. Remo

    "as guns laws have gotten looser and getting automatic weapons has become easier." Really we can buy automatic weapons?!?!? If I've read the laws correctly you'd have to have a Class III Federal license to do that. What about all the "other" murders that have been committed without the use of a firearm? If you're going to have statistical correaltion then let's look at the complete spectrum of what the human does. From reading another headline on CNN Holmes was apparently seeing a shrink. What happened there? There are a lot of openings in this.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:19 pm | Reply
  20. Bob

    @ Carl M: Good point: both guns and cars are dangerous. Therefore it would be best if both would require a license (obtained by passing a test) and registration...

    July 27, 2012 at 6:20 pm | Reply
    • sevenseas

      And do you apply this to all the rights then? We get told that having to show id to vote is discrimination, and voting is a right much like owning a firearm. Does that mean that you support discrimination when it is against a right "you" don't like? Why would you support discrimination?

      July 27, 2012 at 6:27 pm | Reply
      • Bob

        Totally off track.... If showing ID for voting is discrimination, it is also discriminating to not let people vote if they live here, possibly their whole life (visa or greencard)!

        July 27, 2012 at 11:08 pm |
      • sevenseas

        How is it off track? Both voting and owning a firearm are rights. The same minorities who can not legally vote due to not having an id are stripped of the right to bear arms by not having an id. How can you call it discrimination one way and not the other?

        July 28, 2012 at 12:01 am |
  21. Bob

    In no other country is violence shoved down the throats of its citizenry like in the U.S. Every unimaginable act has been portrayed on screen, and written as lyrics to music here in good old America. We've all read the reports of how many murders a child has watched on screen by the time they're ten years old! Come-on wake up people! It is simply impossible to expose ourselves to this junk and expect not to be affected. Some more so than others.
    If this guy didn't have a gun, he'd make a bomb or something, nothing would have stopped him from doing what he did. He simply would have done it differently! The question isn't about how to control guns (or any other possible weapon), the question is how to stop people from wanting to view violence. Do you enjoy violence? Do you really think that because you're an "adult" you "can handle it"? If so, then you're part of the problem. Yeah, yeah, you have the "right" to look or listen to what-ever you want. Just because it's your right doesn't make it the right thing to do.
    Why didn't this problem exist back in Grampas' day? You know the answer. Remeber the words "offensive", "immoral", "obscene"? People didn't do certain things because they knew those things were harmful to them, their family and their country, and to society as a whole. Today.... well, who cares?

    July 27, 2012 at 6:23 pm | Reply
    • War919

      Bob, it is the old chicken or the egg argument. You think that life imitates art, but it is the other way around. Humans have been violent creatures as long as they have existed. We fought wars for thousands of years before the first movie or TV show was ever made. Our art emulates our nature and we are a violent species by nature. I doubt that the children in Somalia firing AK-47s spent much time watching movies during their short lives.

      July 27, 2012 at 9:34 pm | Reply
  22. Wondering

    My questions are: where do you get your facts (the UN agencies never lie, or fail to get all the facts)?? What about all of the unreported deaths in 3rd world countries (CNN and Channel 29 aren't known for wondering what is going on in sub-Sahran African villages)? What about weapons in undeveloped countries that are owned illegally/unknown by the government? What would be happening in Syria right now if not for weapons not controlled by the government? If we outlaw weapons here, will the Nicaraguans refrain from sending some that they bought from Russia, if it means a profit, and it damages the USA (a few years back we did that favor for them)?

    July 27, 2012 at 6:26 pm | Reply
  23. James

    People like Mr. Zakaria always cherry pick their data and never include Mexico in their discussions. Mexico has much stricter gun control laws than the U.S. and, according to the map, substantially fewer guns per 100 people. If gun control is the answer, why does Mexico have substantially more murders per capita than the U.S.?

    July 27, 2012 at 6:26 pm | Reply
    • Bob

      For the same reason the US will resemble Mexico in 10 years if these people have their way. Mobs and mafias will have all the guys while the average Joe follows the rules and finds himself dead.

      July 27, 2012 at 6:49 pm | Reply
    • real statistics

      Stricter gun laws cause more murders by gun and more total murders. Britain enacted stricter gun laws after a big shooting rampage several years ago and now murders by gunshot are up. Same story in Australia.
      Conversely, loosening gun laws result in fewer gun murders and fewer total murders. Several states in the US have reduced gun restrictions in the past decade or two and these states have seen murders by gunshot and total murders drop.
      Then of course there's the little reminder that time and time again (from Nazi Germany to the Boxer Rebellion and on and on), the first thing tyrants do is confiscate citizens' weapons in order for their oppressive power to be secured.
      Considering these points, it should really be the end of the discussion, period.

      July 27, 2012 at 7:08 pm | Reply
  24. Frangible

    Nice map, now try comparing state-by-state or county-by-county in the US gun ownership vs. homicide rate. Oh look it's an inverse correlation! If only there were some kind of academic field where you could find relationships between numbers or something.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:26 pm | Reply
    • David Hess

      Good. Mexico and South America are light green? Compare the US to Switzerland? How many people in Switzerland compared to the US? We have more nut jobs because we have more people.

      July 27, 2012 at 6:32 pm | Reply
  25. Steve Larson

    Your argument fails to establish causation. Let's ask some logical questions. (I highly doubt they'll be answered.) If guns are so evil, why do the police carry them? I asked an officer the other day why the folks with shiny metal disks carry them, and he informed me they did so for self-defense. He thought that disarming him while still expecting him to face violent criminals was laugh-out-loud crazy. However, the rest of us are expected to do it every day. I notice that many folks often suggest disarming the general public with a straight face. Why aren't suggestions that society would be safer if made completely helpless met with the same incredulous guffaws? There must be something in those shiny disks they pin on their chests that suddenly make a firearm a valid means of defense. Here's another question I have (Let's see if this one gets answered, as well): How is it that, 1) Dialing 911 2) Speaking to an operator 3) Waiting for a dispatcher to contact an officer 4) Waiting for that officer to drive his squad car to your location 5) Expecting the officer to analyze the situation 6) Identify the threat and the victim, and 7) Risk his/her life to 8) USE A GUN FOR YOU get classified as "SANE" and any more responsible than 1) Using a gun yourself to protect your family when you need it? Protect yourself? Why...why...THAT'S CRAZY TALK! Only human beings with shiny metal disks (who aren't here, right now) should do that! Remember: 187,968,742 guns in the hands of law abiding Americans killed nobody today.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:34 pm | Reply
    • ed

      The old Switzerland dodge huh...they dont accept everyone into their military..they weed out the insane and criminal..and while they allow guns in the home of their soldiers..they DONT ALLOW AMMO!

      July 27, 2012 at 6:36 pm | Reply
    • sevenseas

      ummm....I don't see Switzerland mentioned in Steve Larson's post

      July 27, 2012 at 6:41 pm | Reply
  26. DaveGinOly

    Z looks at the map and sees a problem. I look at the map and see the freest country in the world (although constantly becoming less free, still the freest) is "brown." A correlation between "Americans' love affair with guns" and freedom? D'ya think?
    Also "serious but non-fatal gun injuries caused during assault have actually increased in the last decade by 20 percent, as guns laws have gotten looser and getting automatic weapons has become easier." Really? Where has the "serious" gunfire rate gone up? In the states that actually relaxed their gun laws, or in Chicago, where the weekly body count is in double-digits? NYC? Other places where firearms ownership is still seriously restricted? I'd like to see a breakdown about WHERE this rate is increasing, and I'm willing to bet that it's not in those places where gun/concealed carry laws have been relaxed. Also automatic weapons are essentially not available to civilian buyers (and prices for those automatic weapons that can be transferred are astronomical and the transfer still requires fingerprinting, a background check, a checkoff signature from the local police and the payment of a transfer tax to the ATF, a process that hasn't changed in many years). Jeez, you'd think journalists would know this by now, us gun nuts correct them often enough!

    July 27, 2012 at 6:39 pm | Reply
  27. Bob

    How many times has a governing group taken away everyone’s rights and weapons in the name of the greater good, only to turn around and exploit those very people? From where I stand, the only problem was that the good folks in that movie theater were unarmed. If they had been, they could have taken care of this guy and gone back to their movie. My grandfather used to say that “locks only keep honest people honest”. In the same manner, gun control will only increase the number of victims out there because the honest people will stay honest and vulnerable because the bad guys don’t care about laws.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:45 pm | Reply
  28. TonyB

    The US has at least four times more fatalities from automobile accidents than from guns, according to the Department of Transportation. The US leads the world in automobile fatalities. Where is the outcry?

    Gun control to solve gun violence is like abstinence to solve AIDS. It's great in theory, but it isn't practical.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:47 pm | Reply
  29. Ryan

    "The data shows we compare badly on fatalities, too. The U.S has three gun homicides per 100,000 people. That’s four times as many as Switzerland, ten times as many as India, 20 times as many as Australia and England."

    All of that is true, but South Africa, which is very strict on gun laws, has about 75 per 100,000, which is about 18 times more than the US, among many other countries that are a lot higher. Your 'data' was clearly meant to deceive. So we have a lot more countries with a lot stricter gun laws that have several times higher gun related homicide rates. Your entire argument is completely garbage.

    July 27, 2012 at 6:47 pm | Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

Leave a Reply to jim


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.