What are your thoughts on lawsuits following a shooting, as in the recent shooting in Aurora as well as other massacres such as Virginia Tech or Columbine or Fort Hood, that sue others not directly responsible for the shootings? Article excerpts from... In wake of tragedy, lawyers step in: Colorado shooting survivor plans suit, says publicist | The Lookout - Yahoo! News Obviously the main, and often lone target, should be the shooter. Of course there's only so much justice and reparations you can get from imprisonment and/or execution, and confiscation of all the shooter possessed. There is more money out there suing things like theater chains and the movie producers (Aurora case) or the university (Virginia Tech) or video games (Columbine), or the government (Fort Hood)... Then there's the matter of notifying people as a massacre is on-going. Is it the responsibility of every kinds of possible institution or gathering (school, work, camp, etc.) to have a notification alert, and if so, how practical could it be?... Here's another thing for consideration... if somebody shows any trace of being troubled (and who among us hasn't been rattled or angered any time in their lives?), do we want authorities determine who is "at risk" at risk of them being sued later on?... That's not to say people should not be irresponsible in positions where they could have helped and prevented a situtation from worsening. And you want to be sensitive to people suffering from a recent attack and/or loss and want them to be compensated as much as humanly possible without inflicting undo harm on others. Thoughts?