I usually end up seeing things here first! Usually look to Wash Post and NyTimes for articles once I hear something happened. I have the local free paper's blog (Slog) and a local neughborhood blog that get me pretty much all the local news I need. I never read the Seattle Times.

He was in head-to-toe Kevlar, so someone shooting from the audience would have had to make a perfect head shot in a dark, smoke-filled theater.

Yeah. Without shooting any of the terrified people trying to get away.

It baffles me that I, a person who has never even fired a gun, can comprehend the logistics of this, yet someone who is so in love with guns cannot see how another gun in the hands of some random would-be self-styled hero in that situation would make things even worse.

A nice piece about Batman and what happened: [link]

There are some arguments I know not to pursue. After 26+ years, some things aren't going to change and some things should be left to wither on the vine.

I guess I am seriously overwhelmed. I'm just sitting here, randomly breaking into tears, and I can't do anything.

My sister just called me -- I'm her local news source. Whenever she hears about anything happening, she calls me to find out what's going on. So I just related the whole story to her. Now I just want to go back to bed.

It baffles me that I, a person who has never even fired a gun, can comprehend the logistics of this, yet someone who is so in love with guns cannot see how another gun in the hands of some random would-be self-styled hero in that situation would make things even worse.

Even without the smoke, how many civilians who are relaxed and anticipating a movie are going to have the wherewithal to react effectively enough to make that kind of shot? Not many is what I'm thinking. Not without getting hit him/herself or accidentally shooting someone else.

even most well-trained professionals are not going to expect a shooting in a movie theater of all places. when you are caught off-guard, it makes accurate assessment of the circumstances and how to deal with the perp more difficult.

Great. Browser crash, lost post.

Any LEO I've worked with is going to ask a civilian not to open fire in a dark crowded room with smoke and/or tear gas at a shooter wearing clothes making him harder to see, whether or not the crowd has started panicking yet. I'd be surprised if one of their own would be officially sanctioned to do the same. if Colorado law had allowed someone to shoot him before he kicked the door open (someone let him in?) that would have been great. But I've been told Colorado laws pretty much gave him those guns for Christmas, and the parents who took their babies to the movies should know better and it's their fault their kids got hurt.

Lotsa people right on point, as always.

I phrased my news question wrong. Obviously, as I noted, you can go to news.google.com. But I'm asking for an equivalent to [link] or [link] -- a news desk to whom you'd go thinking "I want to see their opinion/coverage on this breaking story. They have good people and give balanced non-hysterical treatment." As a jumping point--I'm not assuming even Rupert Murdoc has succeeded in mapping the needs of his psyche onto every article in a paper.

Unrelatedly, LeN--do you think byword is worth the price is I also have coding needs?

ita, I am very partial to NPR's coverage as well the NYT, though they can be less timely.

What's a LEO?