I wasn't anywhere near Aurora on Friday morning, but some people I know and love were (thankfully, they are all okay). It's taken me a few days to adequately process the horror of what happened, and, as part of the nationwide conversation about gun control that always seems to arise in the wake of a mass shooting, I've done a lot of thinking about my stance on that issue. The Aurora massacre caused me to wrestle with myself more than I have in a long time--more than Platte Canyon or Northern Illinois (both of which also took place within 150 kilometers of where I was living at the time), more even than Virginia Tech.
Before I continue, I should mention that a) I utterly and completely deplore what happened in Aurora on Friday and my heart breaks for the victims and those close to them, and b) I have no doubt that gun control advocates argue from a place of compassion and are making a genuine good-faith effort to solve what is undoubtedly a serious problem. The former statement should go without saying, but if I didn't, somebody would surely accuse me of sympathizing with the shooter (who I shall not do the honor of mentioning by name), and nothing could be further from the truth. The latter statement is intended to emphasize that I do not generally impute any sinister motives to those who argue for stronger gun control, and that, although I disagree with them on this issue (as we shall see shortly), there is a perfectly valid logical basis for their position.
Would that they would extend the same courtesy to those who hold my point of view.