SmallCaliberCentral

We're all saddened by the pointless mass shooting in Auroura CO last evening, and my prayers go out to the victims and their families. Upon watching the news bulletins on the shooting, I found it hard to believe that with all those movie-goers attending, that there was not ONE guy with his CWP and weapon able/willing to put a stop to the madness.

Is it just me, or does anyone else think there should have been a citizen in attendence willing to 'step up' to stop the carnage? Maybe there's not enough CWP's issued in the area, or maybe the plain fact exists that no one there was armed except the perp.....sad. The next time you're about to go out to a movie, dinner or another venue, and someone asks you "do you really need a .45 to go to the movies?".....you'll know the correct answer.

Of course, now our "president" will surely call for more gun control, high-cap mag bans, assault weapons bans........here we go again.

Rick I'll 2nd your thoughts. My prayers also go out to the familys.
Who is the perp?? No profiling of a person off there rocker.
I was also shocked when I heard the new this am.
Yes I'm sadden by this. Why???
Later
Ray P

Rick, I think you've missed a very important piece of information about this tragedy. That movie theater was a "gun-free zone" and the policy was strictly enforced. The reason a legally armed citizen wasn't there is because IT WAS AGAINST THE RULES. You don't see that on the news, though, do you? Nope. All we hear about are the legally purchased guns and ammo that were used.

There are probably many answers some not so pleasant but one of the biggest issues is the media. Just 2-days ago an older man stopped what could have been a similar screen at an Internet shop in FL IIRC. About 30-seconds coverage on Good Morning America and I must give them credit for showing it if only for 30-seconds.

Training and knowing when to act and of course the after affects from the local DA. In summary most folks just don't know when they should or should-not take action in these scenarios. In the end most folks don't realize the power of motivation. And a motivated individual is hard to stop, usually requiring equal or superior force.

Of course the crooks love gun-free zones.

Mike wrote:Rick, I think you've missed a very important piece of information about this tragedy. That movie theater was a "gun-free zone" and the policy was strictly enforced..

Now there's a policy that seems to be in need of reconsideration. Wonder how many of those unfortunate souls MAY have had on their weapons had this idiotic policy NOT been in place? I don't leave home without mine......ever. And as of now, I'll never step foot in any business that has such a policy in place....I'll do business elsewhere and let them know why.

This tragedy may have been prevented IF that rediculous policy had NOT been in place. Something to consider.

Two points:

1) along with being well armed, he was also "armored: wearing kevlar vest, leg, neck, groin protectior and tactical helmet. Anyone with competent training knows to be aware that people don't just get shot and fall down or die: it's important to be alert to the fact that the BG may have armored up, and make adjustments accordingly. IMHO, it would have taken a determined and trained citizen to bring this guy down. Of course even the fact that someone was shooting back at him might very well have changed the dynamics of the situation.

2) Depending on your state laws, a "gun free zone" sign may mean nothing more than the company doesn't want you to bring a firearm in....and if you're found with one, they'll ask you to leave. The fact that a theater (or other venue) has that policy hasn't deterred me from carrying concealed any way. YMMV.

George

Mike wrote:Rick, I think you've missed a very important piece of information about this tragedy. That movie theater was a "gun-free zone" and the policy was strictly enforced. The reason a legally armed citizen wasn't there is because IT WAS AGAINST THE RULES. You don't see that on the news, though, do you? Nope. All we hear about are the legally purchased guns and ammo that were used.

Exactly, why rules like that do not work. I has long proved that when you disarm legal and honest citizens, only the bad guy will have one or more. If just a few would have been able to have their CCW and been armed, maybe not nearly as many would be dead or injured, but most people just can not get it through their thick skulls that bad guys do not follow gun laws, etc. I hope the management of the theatre rethinks their policy, but I doubt it. The nuts in this old world of ours are the anti=gun people i.e. Obama, Clinton, Holder and so many others. But most, if not every one of them have armed body guards and even have CCW's, as I understand some like Fienstein in Ca (who is fully against guns) has and carrys. So I have been told by officials in S.F. Ca. I really feel sorry for the victims of this type of crime, as they are what happens when the anti-gun people have their way. Sorry for the rant. Bill K

Mike wrote:Rick, I think you've missed a very important piece of information about this tragedy. That movie theater was a "gun-free zone" and the policy was strictly enforced. The reason a legally armed citizen wasn't there is because IT WAS AGAINST THE RULES. You don't see that on the news, though, do you? Nope. All we hear about are the legally purchased guns and ammo that were used.

Exactly, why rules like that do not work. I has long proved that when you disarm legal and honest citizens, only the bad guy will have one or more. If just a few would have been able to have their CCW and been armed, maybe not nearly as many would be dead or injured, but most people just can not get it through their thick skulls that bad guys do not follow gun laws, etc. I hope the management of the theatre rethinks their policy, but I doubt it. The nuts in this old world of ours are the anti=gun people i.e. Obama, Clinton, Holder and so many others. But most, if not every one of them have armed body guards and even have CCW's, as I understand some like Fienstein in Ca (who is fully against guns) has and carrys. So I have been told by officials in S.F. Ca. I really feel sorry for the victims of this type of crime, as they are what happens when the anti-gun people have their way. Sorry for the rant. Bill K

Carrying in a "no weapons" location usually isn't a big deal. As long as you're not printing or no one sees the weapon,no one will even know. If the owner confronts you then you have a polite discussion with them about how BG's love places were they're the only ones with weapons. If you're asked to leave, leave and shop somewhere else.

With the heightened security pressure that I'm anticipating in theaters, my humble opinion is either don't carry or just avoid theaters for a while. Can you imagine the panic that would ensue from someone "discovering" a CCDW in a "no weapons" theater right now?

And Holder isn't anti-gun, look how many he gave to the Mexican drug gangs!

I am like Rick I do my business where I and my gun are welcome. I just had some posters made for my concealed carry classes from a print shop that I went to school with the owner. When I went to pick them up the no weapons allowed was posted on the door. I went in with my comfort piece on, picked up my order then told them to cancel the other order and they would not see any of my money again. When asked why I stated that I as a legal gun owner I obeyed the laws (unlike the bad guy who will care less about their stupid sign) and I was not going to disarm to pick up my order. I don't like no gun zones = killing zones.
My prayers to all the victims and their family's
Be Always Aware Always Alert
Cracker