Gunman Opens Fire During "The Dark Knight Rises"

[tcsparky]

I attended an IMAX showing of the trilogy last night, ending with Dark Knight Rises opening at midnight. I can totally see how the audience may have originally thought it was part of the theatrics planned by the movie theatre. And depending on where it occurred in the movie, the adjacent theatres wouldn't have noticed the sounds right away. This is very sad.

I also see how this is a case advocating for personal concealed carry. If just one person in that theatre had been trained and able to stop this guy, imagine how many of those 12 deaths could have possibly been prevented.

Let's just hope this guy isn't found "not guilty for reason of mental defect", or whatever they call it there.

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by tcsparky

I attended an IMAX showing of the trilogy last night, ending with Dark Knight Rises opening at midnight. I can totally see how the audience may have originally thought it was part of the theatrics planned by the movie theatre. And depending on where it occurred in the movie, the adjacent theatres wouldn't have noticed the sounds right away. This is very sad.

I just watched an interview with a witness.

He said the guy started shooting in the middle of an action scene in the movie.

His original thought was "Wow these are pretty great sound effects." Then he realized that people in the theatre were screaming.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by tcsparky

I also see how this is a case advocating for personal concealed carry. If just one person in that theatre had been trained and able to stop this guy, imagine how many of those 12 deaths could have possibly been prevented.

There is a huge leap between someone in the audience having a concealed weapon and someone being able to stop the guy. He had full body armor and was carrying an AK-47 (or something similar; I've seen conflicting reports).

[tcsparky]

And it's a huge leap to "the bad guy might be wearing body armor therefore we all should be defenseless against whatever happens." As I said, if one person had been able to stop this guy.....Body armor has weaknesses. It doesn't protect everything. I am willing to take my chances on myself or others in the audience trying to make the guy stop rather than curl up in a ball and beg not to be shot next.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by tcsparky

And it's a huge leap to "the bad guy might be wearing body armor therefore we all should be defenseless against whatever happens." As I said, if one person had been able to stop this guy.....Body armor has weaknesses. It doesn't protect everything. I am willing to take my chances on myself or others in the audience trying to make the guy stop rather than curl up in a ball and beg not to be shot next.

Methinks you know very little about the accuracy of handguns.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Methinks you know very little about the accuracy of handguns.

Even if you hit someone on the body armor, it's going to sting enough to slow them down.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Even if you hit someone on the body armor, it's going to sting enough to slow them down.

Again, that's a pretty big IF. You assume that they can grasp what is happening, remain calm enough to pull out the weapon and load the magazine, and get a clear shot off at a distance that allows them to be accurate in the middle of this type of chaos.

Don't get me wrong, I think you can reasonably make a case for concealed carry, but this incident is NOT it.

[SydneyK]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Again, that's a pretty big IF. You assume that they can grasp what is happening, remain calm enough to pull out the weapon and load the magazine, and get a clear shot off at a distance that allows them to be accurate in the middle of this type of chaos.

Don't get me wrong, I think you can reasonably make a case for concealed carry, but this incident is NOT it.

I agree. Considering this took place in a tear gas-filled, dark, loud movie theater, I think adding more guns to the mix would just make the environment even more dangerous.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by SydneyK

I agree. Considering this took place in a tear gas-filled, dark, loud movie theater, I think adding more guns to the mix would just make the environment even more dangerous.

I cannot disagree enough with your statement. The disturbing thing about active shooter situations (which this was) is that the subject typically only stops shooting because they run out of ammunition, everyone's dead and there's no one left to shoot, or they are stopped by someone (typically law enforcement). The reason why so many people got shot is because the man had no resistance what so ever. Hell, even if a 90 year old grandma started popping rounds at this guy's general direction it would have forced him to duck and get cover, possibly allowing more people to escape. I'm not sure of the exact details of the layout of this theater but since most people either run away or hit the floor from gunmen I don't see a whole lot of danger of people getting in the crossfire. Also, whoever did have a gun would have the element of surprise on this guy since I'm pretty sure he'd have a hard time finding the movie goer with the gun in a dark, smoke filled theater.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Even if you hit someone on the body armor, it's going to sting enough to slow them down.

At the very least it will. Ive heard of people getting knocked on their ass with the wind knocked out of them while taking a direct shot to their armor. Of course, it all depends on the caliber of the firearm and type of body armor (soft vs hard)

[tcsparky]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Methinks you know very little about the accuracy of handguns.

The you think wrong. I have a great deal of experience with them. From my personal weapons to military training, I know that a short firing range (movie theatres are not that large), high levels of practice and good quality weapons can give you very good accuracy with handguns.

I also know that if one, two or more people in that audience had personal protection with them, then yes, it would have distracted him, slowed him down, possibly wounded or killed him and the outcome might have been different-and conceivably it might have been the same. But I do know that I would rather be defending myself than kneeling and begging. I will not be an unarmed, willing victim.

And body armor is not a magic protection bubble, which is why friends of mine who are police officers are still wary. It has a lot of vulnerabilities.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by tcsparky

But I do know that I would rather be defending myself than kneeling and begging. I will not be an unarmed, willing victim.

[tcsparky]

Again, shows that you do not know me. For one thing, I'm a chick. For another, I am not and never have been an "Internet tough guy." But I will and have defended myself and my home with weapons. I will not be an unarmed, willing victim. Should you choose to do so, then that is certainly your right. Attempting to mock those of us who believe in personal defense shows us a lot about YOU. People who grew up in hunting communities, have been in the military or who have received proper training often choose defense over retreat.

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by tcsparky

And it's a huge leap to "the bad guy might be wearing body armor therefore we all should be defenseless against whatever happens." As I said, if one person had been able to stop this guy.....Body armor has weaknesses. It doesn't protect everything. I am willing to take my chances on myself or others in the audience trying to make the guy stop rather than curl up in a ball and beg not to be shot next.

The problem for me comes with all the other people in the audience with concealed weapons who don't know what they're doing. Not a good thing in a panicked crowd as far as I'm concerned.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

The problem for me comes with all the other people in the audience with concealed weapons who don't know what they're doing. Not a good thing in a panicked crowd as far as I'm concerned.

They've all had the classes, so one would hope that if someone is going to carry a gun, they know how to use it correctly.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

They've all had the classes, so one would hope that if someone is going to carry a gun, they know how to use it correctly.

Sorry, but that did make me laugh. One would indeed hope, but I fear that all too often, one would be disappointed, especially when we're talking about a dark, crowded theater rather than a firing range. Dealing with that kind of situation takes a lot more training and skil than someone is likely to get in a regular firearm safety class.