The fallacy that people in Aurora counldn't fight/shoot back.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not even remotely connected but speaks to minset,

Grand daughter 6 got her hair pulled on the school bus several time until she told us.
I told her fight back, she said it was against the rules. I told not my rules I will deal with the Principal. If he does it again hit him 3 times hard in the face.
He did
she did
got the call
told the principal buy a new tie so you will look good on the evening news or deal with the bully.
never had another problem with the bully or the principal
 
The impression a handgun completely ineffective is false. That's what I've learned from this.

Initial reports or Internet rumors presented images of armor covering over his legs, groin, chest, throat and head. That turned out not to be true.

I'm not talking about going "toe to toe" with an armored, rifle carrying psycho. But, if you've determined it's fight or die, solid hits from a .40S&W and above may not penetrate, but would displace the Kevlar enough to produce a significant injury.

And the "V50 specification " for helmets is the speed of a 9mm, where half penetrate and half are stopped. The gas mask and goggles won't stop much. I've been carrying faster, heavier ammo in my handgun for half a decade.

Would be ironic is this tragedy strengthened us, teaching more people to fight boldly in the event of a small arms terrorist attack on our soil.
 
I've been in a few theaters and when someone in front stands up they are quite easy to see. The actual individual spaces in new multiplexes are designed to hold around 250 max I'm told for some ADA or other code reason so they are not the huge spaces of my childhood.
My conception of the shooter has him very much away from the crowd at the front of the theater with a crowd that is trying to get away so the hardest thing would be getting around to a clear shot but once you got on the edge you would be clear to shoot until he saw you and returned fire. How many shots you could get off in the chaos is the question.
 
I have gone over the scenerio a dozen times in my head. The only one where I could see having any measure of effectiveness (with the exception of returning fire) is to have a 100+ lumen tactical light with you when you to the theater, along with your sidearm. The blinding light will give you a moment of surprise and will disorient as you get into position/return fire. I agree that a hostile person with a long gun and body armor is going to be a formidable force to deal with but not impossible. Any acts of courage are greatly respected, these are just my $0.02.
 
At the risk of being repetitious - there was no way to plan for this and very little you could do to stop it. The shooter/psycho lived nearby and well knows that most people are armed in that 'gun-free zone'. It is a bad area. I know that area, and my opinion is that the majority are carrying - with or without a CHP. Security is everywhere. For those who post that they would be able to take down the BG - you are not dealing with reality.
 
If you were in the back of the theater it may have been hard to get to a more suitable range but it is not hard to imagine a 25yd shot at the most and that could be had with the back of a seat as a rest if you were on the outer edge. I can keep a whole mag in a head sized target at 25 yds pretty easily from a rest, it is unknown if the shooter was actually aiming or if he had a proper offset filter on his mask to even allow it but as I have said, a decent shot could have put quite a few rounds on target before being shot at IMO. The more I think of lights in a theater type environment the worse idea I think it is, there really is plenty of light in the front and in this case the shooter had to have been back lit like crazy.
 
For those who post that they would be able to take down the BG - you are not dealing with reality.
Click to expand...
And a few days ago, had someone asked you how much luck a 71-yr. old retiree (that looks like he's barely mobile) would have against two armed teenagers...?
Many folks will surprise you when they are given the tools to do the job.

I don't know that many are saying they could have taken the BG down (maybe they could, maybe they couldn't), but you're also dismissing possible other scenarios that could develop after the first person fights back.

Maybe the first person wouldn't take him down, but:
1. They might slow him down enough for someone else to have a chance to do so.
2. After folks see the first person refuse to be a victim, how many would follow suit? (things tend to pick up momentum after the first person breaks the groupthink).
3. Heck, as meekly as he surrendered to the police, he may have stopped at merely the sight of someone having him in their sights (as many do).
 
Reviewing all this thread, it looks to me that if you're fortunate enough to be in a position where panicked people don't create problems for you, yes, putting hits on Holmes would have been quite possible.

Guessing: Is there some sort of stage, a raised area at or below the screen? He's above all the forward-row people? And isn't he lit by the projection of the movie?

If such be the case, and you're not hurt or discommoded by others, odds are that hits on him would not have been difficult. He was in the open and very much exposed--and looking into the projector's light. Much like trying to look past a car's headlights to see who's in the driver's seat. You're in what is thus a dark area.
 
Excellent points. I agree with others also that the thoughts that a bunch of average citizens would have shot each other and made things worse is ridiculous. Also that this sissy society is turning out generation after generation of victims. As an leo I appreciate the average ccw holder and if I had to face that idiot in that theater I would hope that lots of them would be there to face him with me. I hope the ones that were there would also have the will to face a maniac intent on murder and not have bought all the sissy society thinking that they have no responsibility for their own safety.
 
Having a rifle does not make you bulletproof from pistols. Pistol fire has the exact same effect on you whether you are carrying a bazooka for a knife. There is no "rifle vs pistol". There is only the attacker vs your pistol, and you vs his rifle. One person can only shoot one direction. If someone was at his back they were in the perfect position to act. From what I've read he was a smaller guy, someone could have probably tackled him and saved many lives if they had the opportunity and the wherewith-all to do it. Many have stated that having CCW holders in the theater would have made it worse, really? Worse than a lone gun man shooting and murdering at his whim until he runs out of ammo or just gets tired of it? There is no "worse" than that. You have to trust your fellow man. The "OK Corral" argument is an anti-gunner argument that has never played out in reality. The fact is several comparable incidents have been stopped by even a single CCW holder. There is no reason not to suspect that if a similar person was there, and a had a shot, that we would be having a very different conversation.

I do know for SURE, that no one can say that if guns were allowed in that theater they know he would have still chosen that theater as a target and no one can say for sure that if they were armed, they couldn't have stopped him if he did. If anyone on the left actually cared about saving human lives they would require public arenas like theaters to provide armed security if they prohibit CCW. But we all know that "saving lives" isn't what they want, the goal is only to get rid of scarey guns.
 
I'm going to go out on a limb here...
It's been reported this was a 'bad' part of town - I'd be surprised if there wasn't a gang banger or two in the crowd that was armed, but being criminals, they're sure not going to let anyone know.

I'd also bet there's a good chance they wouldn't panic, and had the shooter gotten close enough to them to be a direct threat, or if they thought they were specifically his next target, I have a feeling they would have taken a shot.

'Course, this is all conjecture, but what do you think the odds of being in a packed theater without an armed criminal or two being present are?
 
If we lived in a society where even some of these 100-200+ people (I don't know the total number in the theater) had RUSHED this shooter, he couldn't have shot them before being tackled and defeated. Suicide for some almost certainly, but if 10 people rushed him from all angles, he could only realistically shoot a few.

I agree, we are sadly a nation with many people trained to be passive and to give in... again, did 9/11 teach us nothing?

Edited: Based upon the pictures, it appears he had a ballistic style helmet, gas mask, and there appear to be some kevlar panels on the ground. That would have covered the top 1/3rd of his head, and his chest (I've also heard throat and groin). Their effectiveness is unknown. I think the helmet and panels would have been largely irrelevant if he was being fired upon by one or more folks with handguns. Figuring each person empying their 10-15 round mag, statistically and scoring a few hits (at varying distances, with the chaos), that would have ceased Holme's attack. I do NOT see a drum magazine in the photos; I do see a standard aluminum 30 round mag in the AR15.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad to see a coherent thread on this topic in Strategies and Tactics. God bless the fallen in that theatre who are not here to participate in this discussion regarding "What we would have done."!

I do Not wish I had been there! If I had been, I won't say things would have been different. I sit toward the rear and close to the aisle myself when I go to movie theatres. How long did it take for most people to realize the danger they were in and react? A couple of people at least would have already been dead at that point. Smoke would be starting to spread by then too. With any training or some common sense people would first get down! Then they'd start trying to flee. Some more vehemently than others. About the time I (and any friend or loved one I may have come with) am taking cover behind the seats in front of me and possibly getting trampled on by folks who are already fleeing, I think I would then (and only then) be making the decision whether or not to return fire. I'd like to think that I would be screaming for everyone to "Get Down!!!" while I locate a spot from which to get a clear lane of fire at the assailant (who deserves no name!)....

I don't Know, I wasn't there. What I'm left wondering most is how aware I can be without living in a state of paranoia; and how aware the average person Is these days in Our United States?
 
As I looked over the pictures from the Denver post one thing that struck me was the equipment and manpower that was brought to bear in such a short time and how utterly hopeless the effort was.
I'm not trying to criticize the police but the deed was already done and yes the quick turns to the hospitals probably saved some lives but that was done in patrol cars and ambulances not huge mobile command centers and armored Bear Cats.
My point? Have we been lulled into a false sense of security by all the fancy equipment and manpower we see in our city, county, state and federal agencies to the point that we think they can protect us at all times? Even worse, when they can't like in Aurora, will we demand that they grow ever larger and control us all the more?
Do we have the right in todays fast paced hi tech world to expect protection or should we recognize that we need to regain a 1800's mentality about taking care of ourselves. I saw a lot of pictures of sheep in that series.
 
My own opinion is that it's essentially 'learned helplessness' at work. For a couple of generations now schoolboys have been forbidden to defend themselves or others against schoolyard bullies.
Click to expand...

My mom made the principle at my school understand exactly what would happen if I got in a fight or was being bullied. She told him that I would never start a fight, but I sure better finish it. Over the course of 4 years at that school I got in only two fights, I didn't start them, but I sure did finish them.

Back on topic, question I have about the aurora shooting is this, doesn't getting shot while wearing body armor still hurt like hell? Imagine a CCW shooting James Holmes multiple times in the torso, I figure it would get his attention pretty quick and possibly daze/confuse him. Personally I don't believe he was wearing armor, and I don't really buy the tear gas either. I think that was made up on the spot by the media.
 
If we lived in a society where even some of these 100-200+ people (I don't know the total number in the theater) had RUSHED this shooter, he couldn't have shot them before being tackled and defeated. Suicide for some almost certainly, but if 10 people rushed him from all angles, he could only realistically shoot a few.
Click to expand...

Kind of hoping that would my reaction, dont know, never been in that situation.
 
A friend of mine who lived in Israel for more than a decade made the comment to me that"...if this had even been attempted in Israel, the shooter would have been met with a hail of fists, boots...and bullets.".

It really is all about mindset. And America is again a sleeping giant.
 
I'm going to go out on a limb here...
It's been reported this was a 'bad' part of town - I'd be surprised if there wasn't a gang banger or two in the crowd that was armed, but being criminals, they're sure not going to let anyone know.

I'd also bet there's a good chance they wouldn't panic, and had the shooter gotten close enough to them to be a direct threat, or if they thought they were specifically his next target, I have a feeling they would have taken a shot.

'Course, this is all conjecture, but what do you think the odds of being in a packed theater without an armed criminal or two being present are?
Click to expand...

Let's not even look at the bad part of town consideration. What are the odds of being packing in theater with what, 200+ people that at least a couple didn't have CCWs?

People could fight back. Items other than firearms have shown to have a negative influence on the shooters time and time again, temporarility halting shooting, stopping shooting, harming the shooter, redirecting attention.

No, my 32 oz supersized free refill drink isn't likely to drop the shooter. He may even shoot me when I heave it at him along with my wifes jumbo popcorn that cost me my kid's first year of college education money to buy, but he will waste time, quite likely, deflecting the shots, trying to figure out what his threat is, and then addressing it, all the while others will be getting away. Hopefully, others will be pelting him with Icees, nachoes, drinks, and Jujubes. I don't hold out much hope for Junior Mints individually, but as a boxed set, they can cause pain.

Nobody is saying that these refreshmentment and cardiac clogging goodies will stop the bad man. It isn't about stopping him. Likely before anyone responds, he is alreayd killing people. It is all about retarding his abilities and reducing the harm that he can do. If you don't have anything better, at least you can lessen the impact.

The guy was there to kill and do harm. Not fighting back did not impede him at all. You can debate how much non-lethal attempts will do, but note that non-lethal means have stopped numerous mass shootings or lessened their results. Just because you don't have a gun, America, doesn't mean you have to be a victim.

Proof in the pudding,so to speak

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The proof as to IF a handgun would have made a difference has been already decided by the people.

The sale of HANDGUNS in Colo has gone through the roof.
Click to expand...

Sales have gone up. Sales go up in response to all sorts of events. Big deal. What was the impact here to all the previous times sales have gone up?

In 2007, 2008, and 2009, gun sales in Colorado skyrocketed. Where where all those people and their guns at this event? Gun sales went up after Columbine. Never mind that nobody could have guns at school legally. Those sales didn't really help here at all. Sorry, but panic buying doesn't seem to be the answer or proof to anything other than that the American public will panic buy routinely.
 
Last edited:
A bit of information about police who were shot while wearing vests:

http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/...action=display&article_id=1571&issue_id=82008

I haven't read consistent opinions on what a person feels when shot while wearing armor. Of course, there's lots of different kinds of armor.

A decent handgun caliber could lead to what is shown in this illustration. (Image is from the link I provided above.)

Page22c.jpg
 
I'm glad there are others who think along the same lines.

I've been trying to make the same points over the last week and have been torn to shreds over it. Particularly by CCW'ers who called me a delusional fool and/or a terrible representative of firearms owners. Y'know, the people who tout firearms for self defense and spend years and thousands on training for what if scenarios. But when a real situation happens they suddenly have a thousand excuses as to why it would've been "impossible" for anyone to do anything and anyone who tried would absolutely have "made it worse".

I have no delusions that it would've been "easy" to stop this guy or take him down, but he's still a human being and even with the bigest advantage possible is not invulnerable. I don't care who you are. Anyone. Can. Do. Something.

You don't even need a gun to make a difference.
 
Last edited:
Best thread I have read on the incident. Particularly agree with the "can't fight back" attitude & pantywaist-ed chicken heart "men" that seem to be prevalent today.

I have a single 22 year old daughter and I can tell you based on some of the "fellas" she has dated, I weep for our future. And we are in the supposed "redneck" south. (born & raised here so I can say redneck :D)
 
I never leave home without at least a knife, many people had say they went pass the guy, any of them could have jump him. Car keys sticking out of your fist will be efficient in the neck. A pen will do. With all the gear the guy had on him it would have slow him down. In desperate situation, our body shut down the pain feeling so we focussed on survival, and in many case our strenght is multiplied.
I have witnessed traffic accident were people were hurt bad, they knew it but stayed awake, once they see familly member our medics and know they are safe then they pass out.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

X-Rap
  • Locked
Re thinking a laser for EDC
2
Replies
37
Views
874
Kleanbore
K
ACP
  • Locked
Aurora shooting
Replies
6
Views
362
Kleanbore
K
T
  • Locked
Shooting an armed home invader in the back?
2 3
Replies
55
Views
2K
ComputerFlake
C
W
  • Locked
Situational Awareness
Replies
9
Views
750
Karla (Threadbndr)
K
K
An Actual Use of Force incident for Discussion
Replies
13
Views
877
Kleanbore
K
Back
Top