The Aurora Shooting You Didn't Hear About In The Media

While this past weekend's shooting in Aurora, Colorado got a lot of national attention, a previous shooting, which took place in April and virtually no one heard about it. On April 22, 2012 convicted felon Kiarron Parker, just released from jail, entered the parking lot of an Aurora, Colorado church and shot and killed one of the members of the congregation before being killed himself by a member carrying concealed.

Parker had been convicted for assaulting two police officers, breaking and entering and drug abuse. The details of his criminal past can be found here and here.

As the left attempt to politicize the issue of the tragedy that took place this past weekend, we have yet to see this story in the headlines, and why not? I'll tell you why. This story, though just as tragic, had somewhat of a positive outcome. There was a hero that stopped it and was carrying concealed. He saved lives by using his gun effectively to stop a crimnal that had just killed one woman and possibly was ready to kill others.

The Huffington Post reports,

Parker sped into the parking lot of New Destiny Center church in Aurora, crashed into a car, then fired at people who came to his aid. The shooting killed Josephine Echols, the mother of a pastor at the church, police said. Echols' nephew Antonio Milow, an off-duty Denver police officer who was attending a church service, then shot and killed Parker, authorities said.

"Who knows what would've happened if the officer had not been there. It certainly could have been a lot worse," Fania said.

Investigators do not know what upset Parker, but it didn't appear that Parker and his friend were arguing, Fania said.

I know what many liberals would be claiming here and that is that this was an off-duty police officer and as such it was ok for him to have a weapon, but the average Joe should not be carrying a gun. In fact, they would point to police as those who are to protect us from such incidents. What would have happened had officer Milow not been attending the service? Would there have been police officers to protect anyone else and stop the senseless killing that Parker had started? Probably not.

Some will say, "Well that's just one woman, not 12 dead and 59 injured." This is true, but this one woman was a nurse and a mother of one of the pastors at the church. The issue is not how many lives. The question that should be asked here is "What stopped the man from killing or injuring more?" A man who carried his weapon, knew how to use it and didn't hesitate in using it to stop further tragedy.

The point is that we don't need further gun control laws. What we need is more people who obtain guns and train with them so that they can effectively use them, such as Officer Milow did, to protect themselves and take out the bad guy should they face a similar circumstance. Maybe one day we'll get people in office that will eliminate the charade that is "gun control." I'm not holding my breath though.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter.

You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

Print pagePDF pageEmail page



  • jon

    I wish all of these comments were broadcast on the news so all Americans could read or hear them. I am pretty sure that then the debate about gun control would end and actual legislation would be enforced. In my mind, there is no better way to show the absurdity of the far right's argument, e.g. "The more innocent children that die by guns in our society, the more our society need more guns."

  • Jaime Cancio

    You may not be able to change a Liberal's mind; but, you also don't have to come to their aid when their life and property is at risk. My example an asswipe who for years was against firearms and held me in contempt and made fun of me at every expense; however, one night returning to my home across the parking lot he was being mugged and robbed (I was not aware of his situation nor did I see this critical incident situation evolve). Moments after I entered my home came this loud banging on my front door of which I opened only to be assailed by this individual to come to his immediate aid and assistance, he stating something to the effect, "...hurry, "get you gun", and we can catch them"! I reached into his cell phone holder on his belt, pulled out his cell phone and told him to call the police. Now he won't ever talk to me which suits me fine.
    He is also angry I didn't provide him minor first aide; and what the hey, what little treatment he got from the hospital that night I understood cost him $1,400 none of which he would have paid me. Before you think badly of me I did offer first aide and he was so upset I won't help him he refused...

  • MGU

    The author's agenda is obvious, his premise, however, is flawed and unsupported. The real issue is, "How did a convicted, and known felon come into possession of a firearm?". "legitimately" at a gun show/sale the same day perhaps? HA! HA! Sad, but unfortunately probable.

  • ralphwylie

    The Aurora murders were only unusual because they were in Colorado. More than that many are killed every week in Chicago!

  • muleskinner

    Has anyone checked Australia since all the guns have been taken from the people. Crime is through the roof and home invasions are a common occurance since the public can no longer protect itself. How's gun control working out for you Australia? More liberal dumb asses in control!!!

  • doug63

    well lit's obvious...parker is will not report it unless parker is the shootee.

  • Jim Holmes

    Folks, it's pretty clear...

    By a clear majority, US citizens did NOT want obamacare - they shoved it down our throats "for our own good".

    By a clear majority, as I read survey after survey, by a margin of nearly 3 to 1 we do not want more gun control.

    Do you really think the politicians will listen to us this time? Have they EVER?

    Any given politician gets elected the first time because we believe they will not cooperate with the status quo system as it stands, but 2 years later these same "change" proponents are suddenly part of the system and they start to crow about how much money they've brought to our district and how their opponent will "ruin" our country. And we vote them in - every once in a while we vote them out, but it's very uncommon. So I've come to conclusion that anybody, from any party, that claims to be MY representative upon the "lets change washington" platform, is a liar - and one liar is pretty much the same as the next. Dem or Rep or whatever, black white or off-black - the same.

    When we got the income tax, it was to "pay for the war" and we agreed.
    When we got social security, it was to "help seniors and war vets" and we agreed
    When we reduced state's rights in Washinton DC by making senators popularly elected, we lost an essential "check and balance" function that had kept the government from running roughshod over us.

    We ASKED for this type of government, so I guess we're getting what we asked for.

  • Ron Willison

    Thanks Tim. Good job. It never ceases to amaze me how clueless many American's are. Here is some interesting reading for those really trying to understand the world around them.

  • Sutekh

    What we need are Liberal Control Laws. Liberals should be able to talk about Socialism or Geocalorianism, and to worship one or the other, or both in their homes and places of worship, but they shouldn't be allowed to force either on us integrating their religion with the state.
    Evolutionists make fun of Creation Science all the time, but bot Socialism and Geocalorianism are exactly the same thing that Creationism is. The liberals have decided from deep spiritual experiences (that are totally divorced from the material world) how "things ought to be," in the economic sector, and they are determined to make things work that way, regardless of what real economists tell them. In fact, liberalism is far more dangerous than Creationism, because Creationists are not demanding that trillions of tax dollars be put to work proving that Creationism is true. The depth of the Creationist's conviction in his own faith is such that he is willing to spend HIS OWN money to demonstrate that it is true.

  • common sense

    Um ...... question. Since no 1 seems to know WHY these individuals decide to go on these mass attacks how does it make sense to give more guns to more potential attackers? These ppl were once considered law abiding sane citizens a some point just as we all are now. I'm not saying we should eliminate guns from the problem but we definitely need to address the root problem before arming several other potential, chemically imbalanced mass killers.

    • Ron Willison

      In answer to your question about root cause of insanity. Anger, despair, hopelessness, child abuse, and the most destructive. Governmental corruption brought about by the treason and ongoing criminal activity foisted up America in 1913 known as The Federal Reserve act.. I hope that clears it up for you. Guns are lifeless objects. By themselves quite harmless.

  • Walter

    Any law abiding citizen carring concealed should do the same thing.

  • Mitchell Harrington

    The fact that the shooter was taken down by an off-duty police officer is very relevant. A police officer undergoes many hours of training for just this type of scenario, above and beyond regular shooting proficiency and safety training. Your average concealed carrier has nowhere near the amount of training or experience as a police officer. This is why part of me is just as scared of the legal carriers as I am the illegal. Joe Schmoe concealed carrier seems just as likely to freak out and shoot me on accident in this kind of situation. Now having said all that, I will say that I fully support our right to bear arms. Even as a U.S. military veteran (an MP no less), I have never felt a need to carry a firearm. Not owning a gun doesn't make you a slave any more than owning one makes you a man. And if you need a gun to make you feel safer, I truly pity you and think maybe the money you spent on a gun could be better spent finding a safer place to dwell.

  • Walter V. Jeffries

    The movie theater shooting was tragic but it was not about guns and gun control would not have prevented it.

    It is to be noted that Vermont has no ban on concealed weapons, citizens do carry concealed weapons and Vermont has almost the lowest crime rate of all the states (49 out of 50) both absolutely and per capita.

    In Vermont a significant percentage of the population is carrying concealed weapons as there is no permitting necessary - citizens do pack heat. Citizens would have been able to return fire before the gunman got off so many rounds in the theater. This would have at the very least slowed him down if not killed or wounded him and incapacitating him thus saving lives. Bravo to the church goer for being there, being ready and being willing to defend others.

    On the other hand the states where they have the most gun control they also have the worst crime rates. This says gun control is a bad idea.

    Gun control won't save people's lives or stop crimes. Gun control will merely mean that guns will primarily be in the hands of criminals. Gun control is an urban, liberal attempt to take power from citizens and give it to government.

    No, I'm not an NRA member. I'm just logical and not bitten by the PC bug. Unfortunately some people will use this tragedy as an excuse to push their political agenda for gun control.

    • Roy Patterson

      Arizona doesn't required a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Join the NRA. They are the group standing between us and Gun Control. You wait and see, if Obama get re-elected, We have an so-called "Assault Weapon" ban and later on registering of all gun with you needing a federal permit to own a gun. Only 2 guns per household.

  • Michael Calkins

    Allow me to refer to an article that describes how you talk in this article.