12 dead, 58 injured in Colorado at midnight showing of Dark Knight

I'm OK with much of what you wrote, but the general tone of the comments re: the mother in question was of the "WTF was she thinking?" variety. I know it's a stretch from that to blaming her, but it's not much of a stretch. Indeed, even my tired old body could handle a stretch of that (modest) magnitude.

 

I really hope this puts some holes in his insanity defense that is probably being cooked up right now. I mean, yes, he IS nuts for what he did, so was Charles Manson, but Manson is in real jail, not a psych ward.

I mean, to me, if you're out of your mind, you're not telling the police your apartment is rigged, especially after you took all that time to booby trap your apartment with explosives.

 

I get that, but I made it clear that wasn't my intent, as did others who agree with me that taking the kid to that movie at that hour was a bad idea. I really don't think anybody is blaming the parents for the death of that child.

 

It's too easy to say the guy is an average loon. He was enough in command of his mental powers to orchestrate an elaborate scheme that took almost two days to thwart. Every time these things happen they say the kook in question is a sharp tack, but I think this guy really is.

 

Oh he's not your garden-variety loon. They're pretty harmless, as he certainly has proven he's not. I think, however, that he deserves some therapy. Maybe they could let the WBC folks counsel him. They'll all meet up at his apartment. I get to lock the door behind them ... ;D

 

Doubt he has ever been with a woman. None of the people they've been interviewing can remember that kind of interaction.

Honestly, if Holmes or Cho had ever gotten laid or just had female companionship, this shit might never have happened.

 

Knowing this, I'm wondering if he wasn't anticipating some sort of shootout as his endgame.

 

Food for thought: http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/20/living/colorado-babies-movie-theaters/index.html?iid=article_sidebar

 

Holmes was wearing so much body armor, though, that I don't think he wanted to/anticipated dying in this process. He easily could have, whether by his own hand or by the police. He obviously didn't. None of this makes any damn sense.

 

I had the same original question, too. If he really wanted to blow the cops/whoever else to smithereens, I don't know why he warned them.

 

As sobering as this thought is, I wonder if he didn't feel some sort of remorse after shooting so many people. That's the only thing I can come up with.

 

I thought you were against us discussing the side topic.

Notice, most of the posts about parenting have focused on the 6-year-old, not the baby. There is a good reason for that. I would have NEVER tried taking an infant to a loud movie, but I can understand that one. The baby is too young to understand the violence, so I don't think it is a big deal as long as the parents are willing to leave if the kid starts crying.

The six-year-old is a different issue. They are old enough to understand what they are seeing, at least some of it. I think that movie is too scary and too violent for a child that age. My concern has nothing to do with the dangers of a movie theater at that hour.

One thing about the piece you posted. The first quote is a bit off. Markham gives a scenario in which the the baby falls asleep and the parents decide it's a good time to see a movie because the kid will be out for two hours. First of all, you couldn't get a ticket to go see a midnight showing of The Dark Knight Rises on a whim. You had to make that purchase days in advance in most places and the movie is about three hours when you include trailers.

Sorry, but I know what it's like to be a parent of a newborn. You can't plan something like that and assume the kid will be asleep for it. Again, I don't have a huge issue with the parent bringing a baby as long as they will leave if the kid starts crying, but the quote by the "parenting expert" doesn't hold up.