colarado has ccw,but no one was carrying at the movie?

I do not care how well "trained" anyone is reaction never beats action, once this nut case started shooting, and panic sets in nobody can say what they would do. But a one in a hundred chance to stop the slaughter is better than a no chance. Any theater or business that post against guns is posting "I don't want your money"
Millions of honest gun owners harmed no one. I will not spend my time or money with any group that does not allow me to protect myself. God Bless the families and friends of the victims of this "Psychopath"
 
Let's get off the kool aid guys. All that any of us CCWers could have done in a crowded theater full of tear gas, with people running all over, would have been shoot the poor members of the crowd that he missed! This is not an IPSC scenario, this is bedlam and more guns would not have mitigated anything. A situation like this would not even been helped by armed guards inside the theater. The carnage would still have occurred. He was wearing body armor and was moving and firing. This was a very tragic occurrence, but the fact is that the shooter was organized enough and hit fast and hard enough that nothing would have helped. I just wish the anti gun ground could put down their koolaid cup long enough to realize that none of their measures would have stopped this bedlam either.

I saw you post and I did mark it liked and for the most part you are right, chances are the somebody with even a nominal size handgun even if he was to hit the guy would only have pissed him off, and the chances of hitting a innocent would be high, but still given the choice i would rather have had a few guys carrying and ready to use them, than nothing at all, now look at all the taxpayer money that its going to cost to keep this ********* locked up for the next 20 years.............
 
Actually, here in VA we are allowed to carry concealed in establishments serving alcohol so long as we do not drink any. Open carry here you are allowed to drink, but not to inebiration.

Also, provided there are no signs, we are allowed to carry in a movie theatre, or any other public establishment.

Same here, I can and am supposed to carry in the movie theaters near my home. Most of those other places he named have armed guards as well.

I understood where you were coming from in your post, Boz and I wasn't getting on your case. That was not my intent. The FOF training, even a little bit put one in a better position to understand what is going to happen when the 'rush' starts and how to handle it. I'd wager that, with the exception of the military personnel, no one else in the theater has an inkling of what FOF is let alone how to handle a FOF situation. YOu're average CCer with a fair amount of range time might be able to hit that paper target hanging still at the end of the firing line, but thrust them into this situation and my belief is that most would choke, possibly myself included. I like to believe that all the training I've done would prevent me from becoming a speed bump in the isle way but until it happens, no one can be sure.

I'm with you on what to do. My first reaction is to save me and mine by fast egress, but if the opportunity presents itself, I'm leaving with an empty magazine. And If I am lucky enough to put him down, that's when my tactic would change.

On another note. A lot of people are saying that he would have been such and easy target because he was back lit. The last time I went to a theater and saw someone 'back lit' I couldn't tell who or what they were and I was visually distracted by what was on the big screen. In my 'guestimate' he would have been just a dark figure 'down front' until the first grenade went off.

Thanks for the feed back Boz.

This is not directed only at you Walt, but at the majority that have been posting in the past couple pages. Hindsight is 20/20. There is a lot of posts online saying, "Why would you have gotten involved? He was wearing body armor so you couldn't do anything." On that night, in that dark room, no one knew he was wearing anything that was bullet proof. No one would have known unless they put shots COM and the criminal either got back up, or didn't fall down and kept going. The fact he was armored doesn't matter until now, after the fact, we can look back on it. To those victims, he was just a guy that had guns and he was shooting at them. It's very unfair to those that died to say they made the wrong decision, as I would assume the majority of those that died were dead before they could put the big picture together. There is no right or wrong decision in cases like this, as 200+ different people made 200+ different decisions.

Should people get FOF training? Yes. That has nothing to do with what people should have done at that premiere though. No one here (or anywhere that wasn't in that theater) should be saying that another person should or should not get involved because they do or do not have the training when it's not their OWN life on the line. If they have the training, it's up to that person whether or not they want to fight back. If they don't have the training, it's up to that person whether or not they want to fight back. That's it. I agree there is a lot to learn from this horrific incident, but like others have said, we can train and learn all we want, we still do not know exactly how we would react in that exact situation (which will be different in the next situation this happens).
Even soldiers are known to freeze when they get into combat, that's life, that's war, it's ****ing scary.

As far as egressing with my loved ones. I brought this point up in another thread. The lay out of the majority (if not all) the theaters I have gone to are horrible. I never thought about it till yesterday. To egress with loved ones would mean you would have to run 2/3 of the way forward, towards the killer, before making a 180 turn go for an exit. I get to make my decision now, since we have the knowledge of a well planned theater attack, that fighting may be the best option in this case. Anything different would make this outcome different. I do believe, to my core, that if more people had been carrying and made the decision to fight back, the outcome would be different in a better way. We will never know, but I have to believe that. I hope theaters realize the need to rethink the layout of their design, and perhaps renovate to add new exits to allow for faster egress in more directions for any emergency (fire, bomb, gunman, etc).
 
Let's get off the kool aid guys. All that any of us CCWers could have done in a crowded theater full of tear gas, with people running all over, would have been shoot the poor members of the crowd that he missed! This is not an IPSC scenario, this is bedlam and more guns would not have mitigated anything. A situation like this would not even been helped by armed guards inside the theater. The carnage would still have occurred. He was wearing body armor and was moving and firing. This was a very tragic occurrence, but the fact is that the shooter was organized enough and hit fast and hard enough that nothing would have helped. I just wish the anti gun ground could put down their koolaid cup long enough to realize that none of their measures would have stopped this bedlam either.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you....
An armed person or a small group of armed people with any decent amount of firearm's experience would not have just blindly fired into a crowd.
That is just another blanketed type statement that one would expect from an anti-gun person not a pro-gun person.

While I do agree that it would have been 'very difficult' to stop this scumbag because of his body armor and his ballistic helmet, but 'difficult' does not equate to 'impossible'. The report states that this cowards facial area was only covered by a gas mask.
The last time I checked, a gas mask is not bullet resistant.
I strongly believe that few well placed shots to this lowlifes facial area would have been sufficient to put him down i.m.v.h.o.
 
This incident made me think of the North Hollywood shoot out. Two heavily armed men robbed a bank. What stands out, they had custom "body armor". They managed to hold an entire police force at bay for about 45 minutes. Now back to Colorado. The shooter had military grade body armor on. I have a cwp. I think the only way to have stopped the shooter would be a head shot. A nearly impossible shot under the circumstance. Makes me reconsider the need for a laser system on my EDC. I think with a steady hand & a laser, maybe that head shot could have been possible?
 
This guy planned better than most criminals. He made sure that he would be difficult to stop, but he could not be invincible.
He could have been stopped by a well-thrown baseball by someone in the right place and Nolan Ryan speed. Not likely that a world class pitcher would be there when needed, but this scenario is about as likely as some I have read in the past few days. The tear gas, confusion, panic all are variables that cannot be discounted. I think most people acknowledge that the best we could hope for is less carnage & avoid collateral casualties. May God comfort with strength and grace all involved.
 
Sorry, but I have to disagree with you....
An armed person or a small group of armed people with any decent amount of firearm's experience would not have just blindly fired into a crowd.
That is just another blanketed type statement that one would expect from an anti-gun person not a pro-gun person.

While I do agree that it would have been 'very difficult' to stop this scumbag because of his body armor and his ballistic helmet, but 'difficult' does not equate to 'impossible'. The report states that this cowards facial area was only covered by a gas mask.
The last time I checked, a gas mask is not bullet resistant.
I strongly believe that few well placed shots to this lowlifes facial area would have been sufficient to put him down i.m.v.h.o.

With your heart beating like crazy from all the adrenaline, are you sure you could hit his face squarely?

Remember how it feels to stalk a buck? Your heart is always beating like crazy.

Sure, you and I can hit a face sized target at 25 yards at the range. That's way different though.
 
This incident made me think of the North Hollywood shoot out. Two heavily armed men robbed a bank. What stands out, they had custom "body armor". They managed to hold an entire police force at bay for about 45 minutes. Now back to Colorado. The shooter had military grade body armor on. I have a cwp. I think the only way to have stopped the shooter would be a head shot. A nearly impossible shot under the circumstance. Makes me reconsider the need for a laser system on my EDC. I think with a steady hand & a laser, maybe that head shot could have been possible?

It's not that easy as it is on the target range.
 
I saw you post and I did mark it liked and for the most part you are right, chances are the somebody with even a nominal size handgun even if he was to hit the guy would only have pissed him off, and the chances of hitting a innocent would be high, but still given the choice i would rather have had a few guys carrying and ready to use them, than nothing at all, now look at all the taxpayer money that its going to cost to keep this ********* locked up for the next 20 years.............

Well there was not [a few guys carrying ...]. These businesses that post as no-gun zones defeat the whole purpose of CCW. Youre not safe when you go in there.

So end that fantasy. There are still places you can stumble into even in a CCW shall-issue state, where someone can gun you down.

Oh well. It was a nice fantasy while it lasted.
 
I don't think you're right about the doors. Exit doors can be locked to those on the outside as long as they can be opened from the inside in case of emergency. Where I work, the rear exits are all locked to prevent people from coming in from the street, but if employees needed to exit, the doors have a big bar that releases the lock. Push the bar and the door opens out to the street.

That seems to be what it was in this case, actually. The doors were locked from the outside but the guy simply openened it from the inside. So unless you just chain up the door altogether which you can't (not much point to such an emergency exit) you can't prevent somebody from doing that short of having armed guards at all doors.
 
Of course, the shooting range is a much different environment than a chaotic scene. I guess the point I was making, this would be a nearly impossible shot to make under the circumstances. Also made me think, maybe a laser could be an advantage, as opposed to a disadvantage. I've always sort of been against laser systems.
 
It is plain common sense not to permit CCW weapons at --

- a movie theatre
- a stadium
- an arena
- a bar with alcohol being served
- a courtroom
- a jail or prison
- a Federal facility

That will never change. So if you were at the movies, and you had a weapon with you, unless you were an on duty or off duty or retired LEO, you would have been breaking the trespass law.

Aside of possibly the jail and the courtroom that actually makes no sense at all. When will we realize that who carries what and where has no real significance at all - what matters is what the person does with it. In the days of the old west everybody carried everywhere but the person that started shooting for no reason was hanged on Sunday.

Now we spend all that time and energy on fiddling with restrictions on who can carry what and where, that as this case clearly shows the few nutcases really don't give a $$$$ about - accomplishing nothing but getting otherwise harmless people either inconvenienced (or in this case all out killed).

No offense intended, but...
 
Aside of possibly the jail and the courtroom that actually makes no sense at all. When will we realize that who carries what and where has no real significance at all - what matters is what the person does with it. In the days of the old west everybody carried everywhere but the person that started shooting for no reason was hanged on Sunday.

Now we spend all that time and energy on fiddling with restrictions on who can carry what and where, that as this case clearly shows the few nutcases really don't give a $$$$ about - accomplishing nothing but getting otherwise harmless people either inconvenienced (or in this case all out killed).

No offense intended, but...

It makes no sense but that is the way it is.

I miss the days of the Old West.

Back then, you rode your horse, you worked a days wage, you wore your 6 shooter open carry, and you carried a lever action Henry's in case of Indians or highway robbers. Life Was Good.

[It wasnt that good for the ladies however who often died in child birth in those days.]

7 billion people later and now we are jammed into cities with real crime and criminal minds all around us. Can't even go to the moving picture shows anymore without worrying about being gunned down.

Even in Deutschland the land of broechens and bier, someone from the Bader Meinhoff could get to you even there.
 
Of course, the shooting range is a much different environment than a chaotic scene. I guess the point I was making, this would be a nearly impossible shot to make under the circumstances. Also made me think, maybe a laser could be an advantage, as opposed to a disadvantage. I've always sort of been against laser systems.

I believe a laser would just slow you down.

Stick with reflexive shooting and iron sights. You won't be using the sights anyway. Your heart will be pounding so hard in your chest that you will be lucky to hit anything at all.

At least that's what I think, if being shot at with a semi auto rifle is anything like hunting for buck deer.
 
It makes no sense but that is the way it is.

I miss the days of the Old West.

Back then, you rode your horse, you worked a days wage, you wore your 6 shooter open carry, and you carried a lever action Henry's in case of Indians or highway robbers. Life Was Good.

[It wasnt that good for the ladies however who often died in child birth in those days.]

7 billion people later and now we are jammed into cities with real crime and criminal minds all around us. Can't even go to the moving picture shows anymore without worrying about being gunned down.

Even in Deutschland the land of broechens and bier, someone from the Bader Meinhoff could get to you even there.

Well, all the Baader Meinhoff gang people are either dead or in jail or too old and frail by now ... but yes, there is some violence in Germany (where I was born). Not much shooting people up but even that has happened a few times - crazy strict gun laws notwithstanding.
 
That would make entirely too much sense. Surely some would get shot no matter what, but it would end his shooting spree early.

Your post reminds me of the hijacked plane scenario. Hundreds of passengers versus 3-5 men, and yet the 3-5 men win. Why? Because it makes too much sense for the majority to take over the few bad guys. This world lacks common sense.

I think probably because 1 or 2 people are likely to die taking down the armed man/terrorist. Most people don't want it to be them, thus hold off doing something until someone else makes the first move. Not lack of common sense, but fear. Perfectly natural. It's rare for a person to be able to overcome fear and do what logic dictates. Not everyone can be a hero just like not everyone can be an Olympic athlete. That's why we honor our heroes.

I don't feel people should be criticized for that, either. Especially from one who has never been in a similar situation and acted differently.

I think most people who make a big show of being fearless probably aren't.


Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2
 
Nice to read everyone's input on the tragic shooting that occurred. I normally only read forums. I've never registered. The recent shooting saddened me. I have a cwp in South Carolina. I'm also an EMT-Intermediate. I'm new here on this forum. Thanks again for allowing me to post my thoughts.
 
From what I have read about what he was wearing and seeing the items on the bill of sale from Tactical Supply? they have shown on T.V. I don't think it was real "Body armor" that he was wearing. Just Black Hawk protective chest and leg items. correct me if I am wrong.
 
I'm also wondering why nobody tried to tackle him. He can't be facing every direction at once, and there almost had to be people behind him and in close proximity. Food for thought.

That would make entirely too much sense. Surely some would get shot no matter what, but it would end his shooting spree early.

Your post reminds me of the hijacked plane scenario. Hundreds of passengers versus 3-5 men, and yet the 3-5 men win. Why? Because it makes too much sense for the majority to take over the few bad guys. This world lacks common sense.



Maybe because his back is against the wall and no one can get behind him. The front of the theater where the movie is playing is where the exit doors are. I was in the parking lot when this happened.
 
Maybe because his back is against the wall and no one can get behind him. The front of the theater where the movie is playing is where the exit doors are. I was in the parking lot when this happened.

Grizline aren't you damm glad you did not go into theatre #9 ?!

You are one lucky sob!
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,531
Messages
610,692
Members
75,032
Latest member
BLACKROCK6
Back
Top