So, we lack the reason necessary to make life and death decisions under a surprise crisis? Seriously? If CCW holders tended to shoot the wrong person, I would expect to hear about it.
When that nutjob shot Ms. Giffords and others, a person with a sidearm and CCW permit intervened. (As did a handful of presumably unarmed heroes.) In the interview I read, he stated that he refrained from shooting the apparent gunman because he was unsure of the circumstances. Instead, he joined in efforts to bodily restrain the person brandishing the gun. As far as I am concerned that is an A+ on both the Brains and the Balls portions of the “crazed shooter” exam.
Wow. That little interview dropped out of national media attention rather quickly, huh? Didn’t fit the agenda, I suppose. Darn these CCW gun nuts that just won’t shoot innocents to prove the meme.
Colorado is a carry permit state. They also have the usual thugs and lowlifes. Both go to movies. I would bet a paycheck that at least one person in that audience, perhaps two or three, had a handgun of some sort. If they never had the chance to shoot the bastard, they have absolutely no reason to stick around and talk about it afterwards. I, for one, am not going to walk up to a cop at a mass shooting and announce that I am armed. I think you can see why doing so might be unwise.
In Florida in the mid eighties, a carbine-armed shooter at a shopping center was himself attacked by a shopper with a .45. The hero was unable to get a hit, but at least he tried to stop the SOB. The cops, however, treated him as a second suspect, even long after it was clear he tried to stop the murderer. This is hardly a unique occurance on the part of police.
So you can see why some people might hesitate to intervene, even when they clearly are in a position to do so. Or even mention that they might have been able to do so.
If you can hit a teacup saucer at seven yards, or the black of the average bullseye target, you can make a head shot. If you can hit a pillow at seven yards, or the average target frame, you can make a body shot. If you drop to one knee, you can fire upwards at the shooter and put most of the potential bystanders out of the line of fire of that head or body shot. You will have to expose yourself to fire from the shooter. You may in fact hit one or more bystanders while engaging the shooter. But you _can_ stop the slaughter, even if only by diverting attention of the shooter from the victims to yourself. You may be shaking like a leaf, hyperventilating, and crapping your pants. So check that line of fire, take that half breath, and press smoothly.
Most folks I know personally who shoot pistols occasionally and have a CCW permit, could read the above paragraph and know how to handle a shooter in a crowd, _and do so_. Every second you distract the shooter, innocent people escape. Throwing a cup of popcorn would work to a degree. Putting a bullet in the SOBs brain works best. Your personal method is somewhere in that continuum. Yes, you can. Yes, _you_ can.
Some people, for any number of reasons, will decide not to intervene. All it takes, however, is a few who will. Do not become an ally and enabler of the mass shooter by advocating making his task less risky, either by restrictive legislation or by discouraging those who _will_ run to the gunfire.
Reason trumps evil. Don’t give me that crap that people cannot use reason in a crisis. And do not tell me that good people should do nothing, or should be prevented from doing something effective. For _that_ is the triumph of evil.