Ban Movie Theater Costumes – Not Guns

About the Author

author photo

Ohg Rea Tone is all or nothing. He is educated and opinionated, more clever than smart, sarcastic and forthright. He writes intuitively - often disregarding rules of composition. Comment on his posts - he will likely respond with characteristic humor or genuine empathy. He is the real-deal.

See All Posts by This Author

Ban Movie Theater Costumes – Not Guns

feature photo

We live in an increasingly strange world of conservative logic.  Last week a disturbed man went into an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater, armed with sophisticated guns, and shot 71 people – 12 died.  This is a time of national mourning.  The conservative politicians and pundits are saying, out of respect for the dead and wounded, we should not talk about Gun Control.  Rather, they say, we should be talking about banning costumes in movie theaters.  Clearly, the conservative movement has gained the upper hand in the discussion about safety in America.

The premier showing of the last installment of the Batman Trilogy was showing.  People, excited about the fantasy of superheroes, came dressed in costume.  When the gunman reentered the theater dressed in full combat gear some people thought it was a part of the scheduled program.  Thus, they say, people did not react quickly enough – thus, some say – ban costumes of any sort at movie theaters.

The problem is not the guns or the multiple ammunition clips – it is the costumes.  Before you know it the conservatives will want to ban costumes for illegal immigrants.

While no one seems to want to talk about gun control – there are many who are ready to speculate on how the outcome would have been different had the theater audience been armed.  Advocates of the NRA suggest the assailant would have been stopped before he could have do so much damage.  The picture at the top of this post is of a Browning PDA 380.  This 380 is compact and is easily concealed in a woman’s purse.  The gunman was wearing internet purchased body armor – also legal.  Need this argument go further?

Is there more to this essay?   Does more need be said?  If the flawed logic is not obvious at this point then there is little opportunity to add value.

What a shame!

Post a Response