Here is the Drudge headline: Yelling "Fire" or Opening "Fire" - Choice for politicians?

I am not as smart as James Holmes based on academic records.

I only achieved a BA and do not have a masters.

I am a student of politics and the body politic.

I am a student of technology,

Can we allow ourselves to find a good from this horror?

Yes. Everytime a plane crashes for reasons not immediately apparent and hundreds of lives are lost, much time and effort is put into finding the cause and repairing the technology, changing the flight rules or the business policies. Those subsequent changes are "Good". They will and do prevent future loss of life and pain.

There is a value there that I believe cuts across political spectrums.
The extremes of conservatives and liberals know this value
The extremes of those who say yes and those who say know
The extremes of those who for us and against usThere are restrictions on the 1st Amendment.

One cannot yell "Fire" when there is no danger, in a crowded movie theatre.

This is a "Good" thing

The founding fathers should have written this out. They knew of theatres.

There probably were horrorific fires in crowded early American theaters.

But they didn't write it in the constitution or even as an amendment.

So is this relevant?

There have changes in the body politic and laws made from such events.

100 years ago changes to the body politic and law were starting due to the sinking of the Titanic - 1500 lives were lost.
The changes made were considered irrelevant because the body politic did not make a decision about the reasonablness of "Unsinkable"

New Jersey made changes for Megan Kanka - or known as Megan's Law.

The changes made were considered irrelevant because the body politic did not make a decision about how to treat sex offenders.

This sequence or horror then law does not have to be a status quo.

There is a common-sense about the illogic of waste.
Waste is defined in terms of time, energy, money lives lives to name a few.
I want to ask the question why can't we find a method of body politic change and law change to think in advance?

Unfortunately I have known the answer - it is the refusal to compromise.
We all know it and it happens on both sides of all political spectrums.

It stems from a fear of the unknown. Change is the nexus of "before" and "after".

There is also a common-sense about fixing things that are not broken - don't do it.

The only salve for the tension that comes with change is the common-sense about the reversal the change - going back to the way things were.

They say Thomas Edison didn't fail many times to invent the light bulb.

The folktale is that he found 2000 ways NOT to make a light bulb - in addition to the one that worked.

They say that it takes 10,000 hours of practice and literally anyone can be a virtuoso musician,

Is there a number of hours or a number of political choices to make a virtuoso American citizen?
We have video-gamers that are doing this very kind of thing in virtual worlds.

Perhaps James Holmes enabled evil to cross from a virtual or movie realm into a common-sense reality.

Perhaps society enabled James Holmes at different stages of his life - it only seems possibly. Remember, I'm not an expert on much.
Perhaps society can do more to enable good things to cross over from virtual or movie realms into common-sense reality.

Is there some kind of combination of historical sequence, technology, blogs, political talk, radio opinions, laws and common behaviors that can be developed such that it allows 2nd Amendment but prevents James Holmes.

Is this something we are going to leave to our politicians and political pundits to resolve?

There are tools, method and technology that are developing. Voter centered decision support is one concept among many. Only if the body politic allows itself to visualise the future can it learn from the past. Only if the body politic allows itself to learn from the past, decide when it is time to change, can it visualise the future.

Remember, we are the country that put Armstrong on the moon, invented the internet.

American politics needs an inventive mindset in approaching thoughts and discussions of James Holmes and firearm