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?

To become extraordinary people, we can’t behave in ordinary ways
Science or bias? What if there’s no proof that eating fat will kill you?
Art, culture are keys to winning the future for freedom of choice
Reading people is a survival skill which all children need to learn
Paradox of choice can leave us longing for certainty of the past
Class experiment is evidence: Folks want something for nothing
The Alien Observer: The blind are leading the blind
The love I crave seems beyond horizon, always out of my reach
Governments can recognize rights, but no government creates rights