Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah, in the dark theater hundreds of people would have drawn their guns and fired... And would have been far more likely to hit other bystanders rather than the guy wearing body armor who they couldn't even see clearly.
"We'd have less gun violence if only we had more guns" is just a stupid argument.
Almost as stupis as we'll have less gun violence by punishing those who obey the laws. This is what your gun control lobby is trying to do.
unless they had Navy Seal's skills and gun accuracy, Can you imagine what would had happened if other people inside the theater started to shoot? Remember the scenario: dark place, tear gas everywhere, people crying and running...the casualties would have been double...
wrong,wrong! plenty of people saw the shooter if they all had guns they would have drop the guy before he had a chance to kill and would all of those people!!
wrong,wrong! plenty of people saw the shooter if they all had guns they would have drop the guy before he had a chance to kill and would all of those people!!
He was in full armor including a helmet. He was dressed like a SWAT team member. However, an Aurora police officer noticed that something about his helmet didn't look right; it wasn't an APD helmet. That's how they stopped the p****.
A good marksman not being trampled by people in their haste to escape. A good marksman with an AR that would also not have been confused as another perp and shot by another citizen. A good marksman, who would also be comfortable attending a theater full of similarly armed people without knowing their training or qulifications to "carry". Not likely.
Most "good marksmen" I know, who've taken years of training to qualify for various levels of certification would not even think of taking their family to a theater full of gun toter's unless he,firstly, had personally "vetted" every one of them for their qualification to be carrying a weapon in proximity to his family.
Where do you live? How many people are carrying guns around you every day? If you were able to find the answer it would likely surprise you based on this comment........
No, but it will certainly slow him (or her) down. You can't kill 12 people and injure 58 more in a matter of minutes with knives, baseball bats and all the other etc.
I was with you until the last paragraph. It seems like the right is taking advantage of this situation and calling for every theater-goer to carry a concealed weapon.
Sure, you can always manipulate statistics to show what you want!
Really? How about a few gallons of gas and a lighter or maybe a chain saw?
Doesn't anyone remember that LONG news video clip of those two guys that dressed in similar armour a few years back and armed themselves with SAWS to rob a bank.
The gist of the video was that even with being surrounded by cops and being shot freqently they were still able to affect magazine change-outs and select from an open trunk of a car any number of optional weapons to continue their progress down an open street in broad daylight with everything hitting them but the kitchen sink. Hollywood Shootout 1997
It took neck or head shots to do them in with one of them simply putting his pistol under his own chin to end it all.
Many cops, with much training, all armed with 45's to riot shotguns, many hits on perps and yet they still walked calmly around doing their deed for what seemed an endless amount of time.
Now transpose one of those dudes into a crowded, dark, noise ridden, tear gas infused theater and continue to speculate how effective Dudley Doright with his trusty Colt Defender would have been? My guess is he may have saved a couple of lives by simply drawing the perps fire to one target for 3 seconds.
Why do people who know absolutely nothing about guns always try to pretend that they know about guns by making posts like this one?
You know for a fact those cops were all shooting 9mm's and .40's do you?
It has been popular for more than some to apply and get permission to use the venerable .45ACP as their primary weapon for eons as all do not fit your description of being crappy shooters and wanting more rounds in the mag. I will state for the record that most cops I know want the perfect compromise of stopping power AND rounds available AND they can shoot as good as most CCW holders I've met.
You are willing to ascribe more "shootist" acuman to casual theater goers than to any number of cops who DID get training and who ARE required to perform frequent re-qualifying range practice not being able to pulloff the critical head shot under fire whereas your average Joe Schmoe is going to be mr. cool and accomplish this feat while not only under fire but in a crowded, darkened, tear gas infused, theater where pandemonium reigns supreme.
C'mon here get a grip on some semblance of reality and this discussion will go better instead of round and round the Wyatt Earp mulberry bush.
Police officers qualify twice a year, shoot at bed sheet sized silhouettes, shoot at a max distance of 45 feet, and only need to hit the paper in order to qualify. A lot of cops never shoot other than the twice a year requirement. Why do people who don't know what they're talking about insist on continually commenting on these things?
He was in full armor including a helmet. He was dressed like a SWAT team member. However, an Aurora police officer noticed that something about his helmet didn't look right; it wasn't an APD helmet. That's how they stopped the p****.
You do understand that at best body armor only prevents penetration. The impact of a bullet is often measured in over a ton per square inch of energy. In other words if shot in the chest by a 44 mag he would have been knocked off his feet at the very least and most civilian body armor wont stop a magnum.
If shot in the side by say a 45 acp he would have had broken ribs.
Please stop talking about body armor as if he was wearing an M1 tank.
Police officers qualify twice a year, shoot at bed sheet sized silhouettes, shoot at a max distance of 45 feet, and only need to hit the paper in order to qualify. A lot of cops never shoot other than the twice a year requirement. Why do people who don't know what they're talking about insist on continually commenting on these things?
Correct. Most cops are not as good with their weapons as the average gun owner. The average gun owner shoots more than most cops.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
