Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Guns Save Lives

---

From Moonbattery

James Holmes has a lot in common with fellow evil maniac Matthew Murray, who was also aged 24 when he barged into a church in 2007 determined to kill as many as possible. Like Holmes, he was armed to the teeth. But whereas Holmes killed 12 and injured at least 50, Murray’s body count was only 2 killed and 2 wounded. The difference? He encountered a law-abiding citizen who was armed.

Read more: http://moonbattery.com/?p=14438

She may be the reason he wore body armor.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Have to stand by my original assertion this case was unique due to the environment (dark and very crowded) and the situation (gas grenades going off).

Plus he was at the front of the theater by the screen shooting into the crowd, anyone not in the first few rows would have to shoot into the crowd between them to try and take him out. A large modern movie (like the one this happened in) theater can easily hold 600 people and this movie had sell out crowds around the country.

I stillthink an armed citizen would not have helped, and may have in fact increased the death toll. The only way to neutralize this guy was to get him in the parking lot on his way back in to the theater, which would have required a crystal ball, which alas, few of us remember to bring with us when we leave our cars.

All in all shame he didn't off himself after. Sucks to be a Colorado tax payer stuck feeding this dude for life.

taxpayer money for feeding, housing, guarding and paying for his attorney and court costs for all the following appeals too. Maybe 10 yrs from now they will finally put this ass wipe out of everyone's missery.

I'd feel a lot better about it if they put him in with the general prison population instead of segregating him in the women's section. Or better yet, maybe: - give him to those WOMEN.

Kreutz - I still think an armed citizen merely shooting into the air might have slowed down Holmes. The thing is we will never know.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

The reason that everybody in the theater can see the movie is the same reason that someone in the back of the theater could fire on this joker.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Kreutz wrote:I stillthink an armed citizen would not have helped, and may have in fact increased the death toll. The only way to neutralize this guy was to get him in the parking lot on his way back in to the theater, which would have required a crystal ball, which alas, few of us remember to bring with us when we leave our cars.

Kreutz,

Please consider this when thinking about the affect that an armed citizen could have played in this situation.

- Holmes was at the front of a theater unloading several weapons for at least a couple of minutes. That is a lot of time for someone who was legally armed to have intervened. Imagine if he had just shot at people for 60 seconds, or 30 seconds, or 20... How many people would have been spared if he had been cut short in that fashion?

As for the darkness of the theater...the muzzle flash of a shotgun going off multiple times would most certainly illuminate the target.

allingeneral wrote:

Kreutz wrote:I stillthink an armed citizen would not have helped, and may have in fact increased the death toll. The only way to neutralize this guy was to get him in the parking lot on his way back in to the theater, which would have required a crystal ball, which alas, few of us remember to bring with us when we leave our cars.

Kreutz,

Please consider this when thinking about the affect that an armed citizen could have played in this situation.

- Holmes was at the front of a theater unloading several weapons for at least a couple of minutes. That is a lot of time for someone who was legally armed to have intervened. Imagine if he had just shot at people for 60 seconds, or 30 seconds, or 20... How many people would have been spared if he had been cut short in that fashion?

As for the darkness of the theater...the muzzle flash of a shotgun going off multiple times would most certainly illuminate the target.

My reaosn for that post was more one of cautiousness. Lets say you or I did take some pot shots at the little bitch. Here are some possible scenarios:

1) We're awesome Delta force bad-asses, we shoot him in the face, penetrating the soft gas mask and killing him instantly. Body armor and helmet? HAH! We're heroes!

2) We shoot into the air as as been suggested. Now everyone thinks there two shooters. Crap!

3) Even shooting down, with people standing up to run, well, we clip a few innocents, perhaps fatally. Manslaughter charges at least. Get to hold hands with Ronald McDonald while being sodomized in prison. Not cool.

Given the environment and situation # 2 or 3 would have been highly likely. And would have drawn legal gun owners into the fray and demonized us all as irresponsible vigilantes.

I'm not saying that we should never step up, I'm saying in this one instance I don't think the risk to lives, limbs, or the reputation of armed citizens would have been justifiable in taking a shot. Its not a dig on taking action, just some armchair quarterbacking in a big picture sense. There are many instances of an armed citizen saving the day, but I really don't think this would have been one of them.

Kreutz wrote:Have to stand by my original assertion this case was unique due to the environment (dark and very crowded) and the situation (gas grenades going off).

Plus he was at the front of the theater by the screen shooting into the crowd, anyone not in the first few rows would have to shoot into the crowd between them to try and take him out. A large modern movie (like the one this happened in) theater can easily hold 600 people and this movie had sell out crowds around the country.

I stillthink an armed citizen would not have helped, and may have in fact increased the death toll. The only way to neutralize this guy was to get him in the parking lot on his way back in to the theater, which would have required a crystal ball, which alas, few of us remember to bring with us when we leave our cars.

All in all shame he didn't off himself after. Sucks to be a Colorado tax payer stuck feeding this dude for life.

That's not exactly true. There are eye witness accounts of people that came face to face with the shooter and not being shot. Those people would then be in prime position for returning fire. To say no one in the entire theater could have possible had an opportunity to take him out is simply nonsense.

Anything is possible.

Looking back I think if you add legally armed citizens into the mix I think there's a 50/50% chance of either cutting the shooting spree short or friendly fire. Maybe even both.

There's no way to tell.

m4a1mustang wrote:Anything is possible.

Looking back I think if you add legally armed citizens into the mix I think there's a 50/50% chance of either cutting the shooting spree short or friendly fire. Maybe even both.

There's no way to tell.

Truth. Hence my armchair quarterbacking. I'm curious, has there been a case where an armed citizen accidentally shot a bystander in a criminal firing a gun situation? If so what was the outcome?

All valid observations.

But Rick has a point.

Shooter did not have the "High Ground",and his muzzle flash is a dead giveaway. even in Smoke.
I believe he also stuck to shooting from the aisles,making his observable position easier to spot.

Imagine you are in the Mezzanine section and have a good "bead" on him...smoke hasn't reached you yet,and you're armed legally. CCW

While we armchair quarterback this,say an innocent that was hiding tried to run.
Hopefully not to the main doors,but the emergency door/s,and got in front of him at the exact time I fired on his azz...God forbid...
Acceptable loss?
Friendlies killed?
NO such thing as a friendly kill,it's a mistake that happened in the course of battle.



I am sure he would now be aware of an active shooter at his azz,and I have given away my position,and I perhaps wounded or worse,an innocent.

Do I care at this point?
Nope.
I am stopping/trying to stop an active shooter. I mean't to say Psychopathic Killer.
I will also say the word terrorist,as that's what he did.
Laser on and Mag dump.
He is on kill mode,and the innocent life I may have hurt,does not equal the other 300 in the crowd...

I would only pray 1 or 2 others were armed as I am probably toast by then.

Carried by 6,or judged by 12.

"The needs of the many,outweigh the needs of the few?"





1 clear thing to me is that he needed to be stopped,or engaged,right from the get - go.


I can't believe no one tackled him....

Kreutz does bring up good points.

And, I also have to question the range of accuracy of a small handgun designed for concealed carry. Because, really, whose concealing a .357 with an 8" barrel?

I would guess (though, I could be quite incorrect) that anyone who would be carrying concealed would have a barrel length of about 3" inches. Even with the tell-tale muzzle-flashes to guide my aim, it seems that the shooter would have been quite the difficult target.

That being said, however, I have to wonder how many armed people would have been there had they been free to carry unrestricted? And, would it have even made a difference?

Even with the armor, I understand that being shot still would have been quite painful. And, as it turned out, the guy ended up being a wuss. The condition in which he left his house suggests that he planned on dying, yet he surrendered instead. He probably would have run away had he even seen return fire. But, of course, no one would have known that, at the time.

Bottom line is, no one knows how it would have turned out had some of the movie-goers been armed.

I do know this, though: While I could shoot and kill a guy like that with no remorse (in defense), were I to miss and shoot an innocent bystander, it would torment me for the rest of my days.

@SHMIV,
You should try a 3-5" pistol at 50 yards. You might surprise yourself.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

WRW wrote:@SHMIV,
You should try a 3-5" pistol at 50 yards. You might surprise yourself.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Lol, I know what I'm capable of with a 6" pistol at 50 FEET; it's not exactly impressive. I suspect that average armed US citizen isn't much better than I am.

As was previously noted, a well lit shooting range, with a stationary target that won't shoot back, is an entirely different scenario that what was presented at the movie theater.

It really is impossible to tell how the situation would have ended, had things been different. And, it's a moot point; we can't change what's been done.

Now we've got people trying to figure out how to prevent this sort of thing from happening again, which is a waste of time. You cannot prevent evil people from being evil.

I'm going to continue doing what I've been doing. I'm going to open carry and demonstrate that a guy with a gun can be polite, friendly, and helpful. I would urge the rest of you to do the same, if only for one day a week. That's the best way to go about it. People are scared of people with guns because they rarely ever see it. And, when they do see or hear about it, it tends to be bad. If more of the average American had positive interaction with an openly armed citizen, perhaps the fear might subside.

Yeah, I wasn't speculating on the theater. Good for you for trying at 50'. I think it helps both distance AND short range accuracy.

As well, I applaud your willingness to present a positive image on our behalf.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

WRW wrote: As well, I applaud your willingness to present a positive image on our behalf.

I'm happy to do it; I just wish more people would do it, too.

I'm serious, I'd bet that if we all committed to appearing in public, openly armed, just one day out of the week, it would make a difference. At least, it would in Virginia, anyway.

We all talk amongst ourselves about how we are all gun-owners and not a threat, but it really doesn't make a difference because we're the only ones who know it. We really need to demonstrate what an upstanding group we are.

Open-Carry meetings at a local restaurant are cool and all, but it doesn't send the same message as an armed citizen holding the door for a little old lady at the 7-11, or the armed guy engaged in friendly interaction with the clerks at his local grocery store, etc.

As gun-owners, we need to demonstrate that we are good, upstanding citizens, and if our communities cannot see that we are gun owners to begin with, we cannot possibly make that demonstration.

Open carry meetings at restaurants? Kinda like this?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/vsVCHE7ayPE?rel=0

Kreutz wrote:Have to stand by my original assertion this case was unique due to the environment (dark and very crowded) and the situation (gas grenades going off).

Plus he was at the front of the theater by the screen shooting into the crowd, anyone not in the first few rows would have to shoot into the crowd between them to try and take him out. A large modern movie (like the one this happened in) theater can easily hold 600 people and this movie had sell out crowds around the country.

I stillthink an armed citizen would not have helped, and may have in fact increased the death toll. The only way to neutralize this guy was to get him in the parking lot on his way back in to the theater, which would have required a crystal ball, which alas, few of us remember to bring with us when we leave our cars.

All in all shame he didn't off himself after. Sucks to be a Colorado tax payer stuck feeding this dude for life.

More than likely all of the patrons were on the floor between the seats and an armed citizen could not have hit them.
Secondly the only time I ever go to the movie is with my grandchildren. If I were there with them I would have gladly done everything I could have to protect them, be damned the consequences. I would much rather died trying to protect them than just hoping everything would be O.K.