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?

Ten years later, it hurts to know she lost faith in me and gave up
Evil media bias? It depends on which lens you’re looking through that day
Need for love drives behaviors; for me, old needs make me eat
It took me years to feel the anger I’d repressed since childhood
This burning question divides us: Why can’t you people be like me?
Pearl Harbor: Simple sneak attack or culmination of FDR’s plan for war?
Don’t personalize: The system is the issue, not Obama or any individual
Didn’t we already try secession? Politicians don’t like losing control
Ugly folks sue modeling industry, alleging unlawful discrimination