Why is MSM ignoring this?

[thatguy]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted


Well that is debatable. As other posters have pointed out, having a handgun in a battle with a guy wearing body armor and carrying long arms might not have changed anything. What isn't debatable is that Colorado is a shall issue state with almost no restrictions on open carry, yet no one else in that theater chose to carry a gun.

Body armor or not. I'm sure 2 or 3 shots center mass would have dropped him. Body armor doesn't make you invincible.

Well you are sure, I wish I would have know that sooner

Body armor or not, no one was carrying eventhough many of them could have been under Colorado law. So the body armor discussion is pretty pointless.

 

[MrZ06]

Wirelessly posted



Well you are sure, I wish I would have know that sooner

Body armor or not, no one was carrying eventhough many of them could have been under Colorado law. So the body armor discussion is pretty pointless.

The movie theater had a no guns allowed policy. The only thing the policy did was to keep the law abiding citizens from bringing their guns. The criminal who did the shooting obviously didn't pay attention to this sign.

 

[jetmonkey]

The movie theater had a no guns allowed policy. The only thing the policy did was to keep the law abiding citizens from bringing their guns. The criminal who did the shooting obviously didn't pay attention to this sign.

I hope he is charged with four counts of disobeying a sign.

 

[MMDad]

Wirelessly posted

yet no one else in that theater chose to carry a gun.

Do you know that? Or are you ASSuming it? Do you know that there wasn't someone in the theater who was armed, but had the self control to hold fire unless he could get off a good shot?

 

[MMDad]

That's generally because body armor does not counteract the big MO. Quite a few bruises and broken ribs underneath that stuff when high-velocity lead intercepts the body.

But we're not talking high velocity lead. Someone who was packing would probably be carrying a .38, 9 mm, or even smaller. Off chance someone is carrying a .45.

The most force the bullet can impart is equal to the recoil of the weapon. Take the force the bullet would have imparted into a .38" or 9mm area, and spread it out through the vest. Does your gun break your hand when you fire it? Why would it break a rib?

 

[Chris0nllyn]

1). No bullet-proof vest, is truely bullet-proof.
2). No one knows if he had a soft, or hard vest.
3). Caliber of weapon, type and weight of bullet, angle of impact, range, movement... all play a part in what happens.

 

[jetmonkey]

I'd just shoot him in the face. That tends to distract people from what they were doing

 

[MrZ06]

But we're not talking high velocity lead. Someone who was packing would probably be carrying a .38, 9 mm, or even smaller. Off chance someone is carrying a .45.

The most force the bullet can impart is equal to the recoil of the weapon. Take the force the bullet would have imparted into a .38" or 9mm area, and spread it out through the vest. Does your gun break your hand when you fire it? Why would it break a rib?

Who's gona Cary a 38 or 9 besides an idiot? You are talking about the ultra compact carry type guns. A compact 45 has plenty of stooping power. My carry gun is a FN 57. Trust me the shooter would have felt a shot from that bad boy.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

My carry gun is a FN 57.

My dream gun!

I carry a 9 though....for now.

 

[thatguy]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

yet no one else in that theater chose to carry a gun.

Do you know that? Or are you ASSuming it? Do you know that there wasn't someone in the theater who was armed, but had the self control to hold fire unless he could get off a good shot?

You are absolutely correct. I should say that even if someone was packing, as they were legally allowed to do, no one chose to get into a fire fight in that situation.

 

[MrZ06]

My dream gun!

I carry a 9 though....for now.

You need get a 40 or 45 for your Cary gun. A 9 or 38 is good if you want something small to hide in your pocket. There is a reason most police departments don't use 9's anymore and have transitioned to 40's. The 9 just doesn't have enough stopping power.

 

[thatguy]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



Well you are sure, I wish I would have know that sooner

Body armor or not, no one was carrying eventhough many of them could have been under Colorado law. So the body armor discussion is pretty pointless.

The movie theater had a no guns allowed policy. The only thing the policy did was to keep the law abiding citizens from bringing their guns. The criminal who did the shooting obviously didn't pay attention to this sign.

Actually a law abiding citizen could have carried their gun just as easily. Colorado law says that those signs can not be enforced. The worst they could have done is ask a person to leave of they didn't remove their weapon, and that assumes the employees knew about it.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

You need get a 40 or 45 for your Cary gun. A 9 or 38 is good if you want something small to hide in your pocket. There is a reason most police departments don't use 9's anymore and have transitioned to 40's. The 9 just doesn't have enough stopping power.

Oh, trust me. Soon as I get the funds, I plan on getting the S&W M&P Shield. Small enough, with a punch.

For now, my 9 is better than nothing.

Plus, I always go by the reasoning that somone with a CCW will draw to prevent an attack, not to kill. Sometimes, the latter is unavoidable.