Yeah sure: If there were armed people in the theater, they would have taken Holmes out.

[trumad]

One of my favorite scenes in a movie is from Clint Eastwood's Forgiven.

Clint plays gunslinger William Munny.

The last scene of the movie he walks into his bar to avenge the death of his friend, Ned Logan, played by Morgan Freeman.

The crooked Sheriff of the town Little Bill Daggett, played by Gene Hackman--(One of his finest roles) is in the bar talking to his men when Munny walks in armed with a Spencer Rifle and pistols.

Little Bill orders his men to shoot Munny and all hell breaks loose.

After the gun fight, Little Bill and 5 of his men lay dead in the bar. Munny is unscratched.

Ya see---Munny was a professional gunfighter and killed many people. He knew exactly what he was doing and killed with cold efficiency.

The guys he killed in the bar were not. They pulled their guns and shot, but were scared to death and simply couldn't hit the target.

Firing a handgun and hitting your target consistently takes a great amount of training. But even if your trained shooting at a piece of paper 50 feet away, imagine having to shoot in a dark theater with smoke, panicked people, a guy firing at you dressed in Kevlar, and loaded with a semi-Automatic weapon that can shoot 60 rounds a minute.

Check out the scene:

[Fawke Em]

1. And even if they hit him, he was covered head-to-toe in Kevlar

and other protective gear.

A bullet might have pushed him or knocked him down, but it wouldn't have "taken him out."

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Soft armor stops bullets but the energy has to go somewhere

Last edited Sun Jul 22, 2012, 11:26 AM - Edit history (1)

It would have knocked him back or seriously distracted him maybe a bit more.

The real issue would have been if the person returning fire was up to doing so effectively in a hellish situation.

[Ready4Change]

14. Bullets don't knock people down.

Their mass is so small that, even at their high velocities, they can't knock people down. If they could, due to Newtons laws, the person FIRING the gun would be knocked down. Bullets knocking people back, shotguns blasting people back into walls, is purely movie special effects.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. You are right that they do not do so via kinetic energy

But ask someone who has been shot in a vest. Many at least drop to one knee, some lose their balance.

I should have use the term knocked him back or seriously distracted him. I will edit it now.

[Ready4Change]

20. And you are right about the real issue.

Most people, outside of the military, have never been in a fire fight, never been around guns being used outside of a controlled fire range, or perhaps hunting. They have no idea what it's like trying to operate under that kind of stress. Studies done of shootings mention constantly how people, trained to shoot conservatively and accurately, are surprised in the middle of a gun fight to learn that they've emptied their magazine without hitting a thing.

It's why you read stories of police firing 50-60 shots to bring down a single perp. It's why the military estimates they used 50,000 rounds per 'kill' in Viet Nam. Under stress peoples discipline usually breaks down and they blaze away, the surest path to in-accurate fire.

[sharp_stick]

2. There are one hell of a lot of

tough guys on computer message boards and in gun clubs.

[Ready4Change]

17. I regularly view several gun forums.

I see a mix. Yes, there is a lot of bravado. But there's a lot of trained realists. And the trained realists who are regulars on those boards tend to get listened to. Those have said the first thing to to is avoid making your family or your self a target. Next is to get family and your self out of the danger area. Lastly, if you can't escape, engage the attacker.

So, the initial responses are often chest thumping, followed by rational responses. But you usually have to read past the first half dozen responses to get to those.

[coalition_unwilling]

4. After "Unforgiven," I doubt anyone will ever be able to make

a traditional Western again, at least with a straight face. There's a scene earlier in the film where the young kid accompanying Munny breaks down and says he doesn't want any more of killing. That's the scene, imo, that dispenses with the Western mythology once and for all.

But your points are well taken. Add in excessive doses of adrenaline (the so-called 'fight or flight' substance) and you've got a recipe for pure chaos, not justice or even retribution.

[htuttle]

5. If Batman had actually been there, the whole thing wouldn't have happened

[Vogon_Glory]

6. Had There Been Armed Avengers In Aurora...

I fear that the death toll in Aurora would have been far higher had there been other armed people in the theater. As likely as not, other (untrained) shooters would have either misidentified the shooter or would have chosen a solution that would have killed or wounded innocent by-standers.

Moreover, there's a chance that James Holmes might have spotted a would-be counter-attacker and shot them first. That would have allowed Holmes to pick up the dead would-be heroes' piece and continue firing.

[coalition_unwilling]

8. You people just don't understand that lone vigiliantes always get their man, because

a self-defense shooting against a single armed predator is nothing like a firefight:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=997801

(in case it's needed)

[earthside]

7. Fantasyland.

I heard a replay of a local Denver rightwing radio talk show early this morning with a couple of guys living out their fantasy of "taking down" James Holmes if they had been in that theater.

It was pretty disgusting.

The theater was dark, crowded and full of some kind of smoke -- and it sounds like all the destruction transpired in 90 seconds of less. But these two rightwing yahoos were convinced that they could have been heroes and gotten at least fifteen rounds "on target" that would have stopped Holmes.

If both those guys had their concealed weapons in that theater and both had pulled them out to use them, under the conditions in that situation, they undoubtedly would have shot each other (since they both insisted that they would have aimed at a "muzzle flash&quot and probably have hit even more innocent movie-goers.

Sometimes a horrible tragic event like this could not have been prevented -- even the vaunted GUN that the rightwing nuts worship can not solve all bad episodes.

I own guns and actually don't have much problem with Colorado's concealed carry law -- but let's be clear, it is absolutely moronic to think that a theater full of concealed weapons carriers all shooting to defend themselves would not have resulted in anything more than an even greater tragedy.

[Stinky The Clown]

9. Its funny. When you read what gun cultists say to each other as they mock us . . . . .

. . . . . . . every one of those meatheads tell us how *they* would do it, all swagger and braggadocio, and cock-suredness.

[Surya Gayatri]

12. Compensating for puny dicks, all of them...

They're not really cock-sure--quite the contrary!

If only they would seek penile enhancement by some other method.
It would save us all a world of misery.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. The only people authorized to have weapons in the theater would have been LEOs

Off duty or retired. They have a bit more training than most of those with a CCW. Whether or not shooting back effectively is still TBD. I am sure the police will model it at some point.

The 6o rounds in a minute is hyperbole. Yes I know it the number came from the cops. That would be the about the max rate of fire. Aimed or effective fire would be half that at best.

Its now been made public that he started with the shotgun, had only one pistol on him, and that the rifle jammed. Also the vest he had was not ballistic armor but a magazine carrier.

None of the above changes anything about the tragedy...but we need to be realistic

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. You know what law enforcement is instructed to do

In cases like that?

1- observe, become a good witness

2- Get backup, not be a hero

Only as an absolute last resort, engage the target.

Since you are an instructor in gun use, I am sure you even know the reason why. But for the rest of the class, it's called follow through and clear shot.

No, this is not bragadoschio, this is actually written policy in several police depsrtments I know off.

I know, I know...there goes that fantasy.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

18. Until there are some well done recreations, its not clear that shooting back was possible

I don't think most civilians or cops could have done it successfully. Smoke/gas, gun fire, people running everywhere...very difficult scene. Maybe former SOF or SWAT, if there was even an opportunity. I am wondering is someone tried to tackle him. No word on that yet either.

We have found out it was not really a ballistic vest and that this rifle jammed. More data is coming out.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Here is a clue

Taking the shot will not be part of it. Why? Nobody armed, that we know off, was there.

As to not really a ballistic vest, Oates was still saying that was last night.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. In another thread here on DU someone looked up what had been ordered

It was not a Class II/III vest.

[Denninmi]

11. Yes, of course the presence of armed citizens would have stopped the massacre.

Zimmerman is a hero, too.



(Just in case it's needed)

[TreasonousBastard]

13. I suspect no one suggesting a shootout in the theater has ever been...

in a real firefight.

There are no Clint Eastwoods or Dukes in wartime or a street shootout. There's a lot of noise and smoke and you can't see a target most of the time, which is sorta OK because it's not that easy to get off a shot when you're shitting your pants, bullets are whizzing all around you and the guy next to you has his guts hanging out on the ground.

I don't know how cops handle it, but military training is months of breaking you down so when you're there you just get on with it. But that still doesn't work all the time-- especially the first time. One Korean vet I know was telling me that the first time he faced a charge he just couldn't pull the trigger until they were almost on top of him. Viet Nam and Afghan/Iraq vets faced different, and often scarier, situations, but it was still the training and comraderie that got them through (if they got through), not hanging out shooting on the range.

A bunch people pulling out their pieces in a dark, smoky theater? If they did get a shot off, more'n likely they'd nail some kid two rows down.

[pinboy3niner]

21. Hell, I've been in combat and a lot of firefights...

...and in that theater, in that chaos, I doubt I'd have had a clue what to do.

[JHB]

22. Four police officers fired 41 shots at Amadou Diallo...

...They were overly-amped up in a place with poor lighing, and when he reached for his wallet they thought he was pulling a gun and opened fire. Leaving aside the particulars of that case, the autopsy found Diallo had 19 gunshot wounds.

In other words, trained police officers who at least thought they knew what was going on missed more than half their shots.

Those missed shots went somewhere. In the Diallo shooting, they went into the wall and door behind Diallo. In a dark, crowded theater, with people scrambling to get away and some kind of smoke/gas canister clouding the air futher?

Not to mention the guy had body armor designed to resist small arms fire.