I see what you did there.
Did you quote the wrong post?
No, but I’ll post the part I was referencing for you here in case the link didn’t work for you.
Certainly that would have been the case in a Luby’s restaurant in Texas two decades ago, when a woman saw her mother and father gunned down by a madman – along with 21 others. She had a weapon but, because of Texas law at the time, had been forced to leave it outside in her car that day.
I concede that you have a thorough grasp of the overly simple.
Well, thank heavens you’re not an armchair quarterback.
And sometimes you gotta wing a few bystanders in order to [del]compensate for one’s “physical inadequacies”[/del] take down a whacko. I’m sure the police and the families of any people you shot would completely understand.
We’re still talking about the other guy, right?
And I’m pretty sure you’re not all that great.
That fact that that none of you victimizers can recognize the dynamic of the situation speaks for itself. It depends on where you are sitting, relative to the shooter. Could very well have been an easy head shot from front row center. From far off to the side I’d go for center mass like the moron with reading comprehension suggests.
The point is just being smart enough to recognize the variables and adjust accordingly -not write off the whole thing in favor of your pet political persuasion.
I still don’t understand what that has to do with my post, or why I’m supposed to be convinced by an anecdote in an editorial. Apart from anything else, Colorado doesn’t even ban guns from movie theaters.
Glad to see you’re focusing on me now. That’ll sit well with the victim’s families. Nice job.
C’mon guys! One more page, and I’m sure you can disabuse morons of their gun-toting hero fantasies! Victory is within 40 more posts!
OK maybe 400…
I prefer to disabuse gun-fearing cretins of their political illusions.
I’m on the side of the people who would shoot back at the gunman. At least then the bad guy would know who to shoot at.
Wow. Another lame taunt based on username, some spectacularly blatant hypocrisy and a bizarre sudden appeal to the sensibilities of the victims’ families, all crammed into such a short post. Clearly brevity is the soul of twit.
Don’t sell the bike shop, Orville.
Kwimby - These are basically good people, all of them.
They don’t understand guns. They don’t understand how most responsible gun owner’s pride themselves on being courteous and safe and would never doing anything to put an innocent person in danger. They don’t understand that years of training and practice create a confidence in one’s ability. They don’t understand that gun owners believe the use of a gun is a last resort. Something that you would do only if it was necessary to protect yourself or your family, and that little 6 year old girl two seats over. And finally, they think gun owners possess a Rambo mentality, ignoring the fact that the vast majority would choose escape over confrontation.
To them, anyone armed in that theater would have been a nut for owning a gun, a bigger nut for carrying it to the theater, and an even bigger nut for thinking he could hit a target 10 yards away with a carefully aimed shot. They assume that an armed theater goer would hide his head betwen his knees, close his eyes, and reach over the top of the seat in front of him spraying and praying, carelessly hitting anyone left alive. Or worse yet, stand up, making as big a target as possible, holding their gun sideways with one hand, while exchange gunfire with a better armed shooter, probably yelling yippie ki yay while doing it. They just don’t know any better.
They also assume the cops are about to enter the theater any second and save them. In fact, the cops are probably in defilade behind their car waiting for the SWAT team to arrive. At 12:30AM it’s likely the SWAT team is many minutes away at best. And the paramedics aren’t coming until the cops tell them the war zone is clear. They don’t accept that this is one of those situation where you’re basically on your own. Your decisions, your actions, everything you do determines whether or not you’re going to walk out that door or be carried out.
We need to convince them that there are intelligent, competent people who own guns, and that those people can act in a responsible manner in the worst of situations.
On further consideration: a newbie who comes out with popguns blazing, picks a fight with everyone, bases multiple insults solely on usernames, accuses others of doing the things he’s been doing all along and claims that everyone who disagrees with him is removed from reality?
I name thee Mr Underbridge.
And probably 15 years old.
TIL Morgenstern thinks acting in a responsible manner is creating crossfire in a crowded movie theater full of panicked people.
Claiming that you can make a shot from the back of the theater to the front through smoke and a panicked crowd is not the best way to do that. Una Persson’s few posts in this thread have been vastly more rational and intelligent than yours or Mr. Sheeple’s.
Where did I claim that?
And, I’m more of a sheepdog than a sheep.
People, people. What we mere mortals don’t understand is that Heroic People like **Morgenstern **and **kwimby **have something we don’t.
Unagi!
No true Scotsman, eh?
Some of us do own guns. Some of us are current concealed [licence/permit/whatever] holders. Some of us are past holders. Some of us shoot on a regular if not frequent basis.
And you’re still wrong.
Don’t try to speak for the entire gun-owning world, bub.
And your situation still doesn’t make sense. You keep trying to make it a lone hero scenario when it’s clearly not. Creating these nice, neat scenarios where it’s not merely possible but likely you’ll have a reasonable chance at taking action says more about your philosophy than it does your grasp on reality.
There’s a reason why even the limited CHL training in Texas focuses on home invasions and carjackings. When you add any more people than that and you can’t be sure whether they’re “good” or “bad”, all that confidence and training goes out the window.
He refuses to answer the question as to what he would do if other armed citizens in the theatre decided to respond. How do you tell the good guys from the bad guys? What do you do if some other hero sees you and the gunman, wrongly determines that the well-armed person in the professional outfit is a S.W.A.T. officer or somesuch, and starts shooting at you?