Lautenberg neglected to mention, however, that this firearm jammed during the attack, and Holmes discarded it in favor of handguns. Isn’t a jammed gun a safer gun  than one that works properly? Does this mean society would be better served by keeping them in the market?

Of course, the theater shooting is no laughing matter. But this latest appeal from the left is a red herring. Regulating guns further will not prevent premeditated crimes of this nature. No reasonable pre-purchase screening would have identified Holmes as a madman.

Only defensive action at the scene is going to help — either shoot back or tackle the shooter. No one can be blamed for holding back in the confusion and terror of a dark movie house, but physical interference could have made a difference. Notably, Holmes was covered head to toe in heavy armor. He wore a gas mask. This means he had limited mobility and vision — and he was likely an easy take-down.

In more than one post-9/11 instance, airline passengers converged on a would-be terrorist and averted catastrophe. Perhaps such tactics should be discussed relative to events in the ground. If people can be taught how to increase their chances of survival in an earthquake, why not a shooting?