What if police were warned that James Holmes might be dangerous at some point before he took guns to a Colorado theater and started shooting people? Surely he would have been arrested and many lives would have been saved. Right?
That’s the standard sort of thing we tend to assume, but it appears that police were warned about Holmes ahead of time and did nothing to stop him. Does this mean police are indirectly to blame for the shootings? This article from The Atlantic certainly implies something like that. It says the latest revelation is “bound to elicit even more frustration and anger.” The writer then says “it’d be infuriating” to learn that police had a warning and didn’t act on it.
What kind of world does that writer want to live in?
According to ABC News, a psychiatrist at the University of Colorado was worried about her patient weeks before the shooting occurred. So she talked to a university police officer, but we don’t know what (if anything) the officer did with the warning. What should police have done?

Unless you oppose all coercion, ‘resistance’ claim rings hollow
Listening to our own inner voice can be the toughest thing we do
Apple podcast listing means you can now subscribe to Love & Hope
Psychiatrist’s insight might be link between spiritual, material worlds
Life’s path can change direction when you’re ready for real love
Christmas looks different now, but I still see joy with eyes of a child
AUDIO: I need to reject a popular but emotionally dangerous path
Telling others how to escape is easier than setting myself free