In either case, it’s not very useful to say, on the basis of one thread, “this poster is fundamentally dishonest and not worth engaging.”
Exactly what “9” we talking about here, Bob? Depending on your response, there’s a good chance my Kimber CDPII is comparable in size and weight.
Just carries a bigger punch. More accurate too. Like facts compared to fantasy.
It’s also possible you and your ilk become highly indignant when confronted by a disagreeable opponent who actually knows more about something than you do.
Possible? Likely, methinks.
True. He may be an arrogant belligerent condescending asshole when it comes to guns and his attitude toward who he thinks of as anti-gun sheeple, but I’m sure he’s just a sweetheart when it comes to kitten pic threads.
You’re right. I think I’ll give you another chance.
(I keed :D)
I thought the premise of this thread eliminated goalposts entirely? You know, the “no” guns option.
Let’s move them back or even farther back and say .22LR from 10 feet in front of him, right between the face mask windows. What then?
I mean, as long as we’re playing what if, right? Bet that would have annoyed the shit out of him! Just a little? Kinda like getting hit with a baseball bat in the face. Ya think?
I think that if Robin Hood and William Tell were drinking in a bar and heard you talking about your supposed prowess, they’d call “Bullshit!” and kick you to the curb.
There are people who don’t like kittenpic threads?
I’ll grant your Kimber is comparable to my Glock 19 in size and accurate “enough”, but that’s even more goalpost shifting.
You want to create your own scenario out of whole cloth where Dirty Harry is close enough to the front to matter, with a fairly specific small subclass of guns (.45 small and accurate enough to conceal), knows exactly where the shooter is, not affected enough by adrenaline to make anything other than a center mass shot realistic, unaffected by other people, unaffected by smoke, no other handgun owners nearby that may mistake him for the bad guy, etc.
The more specific you make your scenario and claims, the more it fails because it falls further and further away from what is reasonable to expect in an ‘average’ confrontation with a maniac.
As I stated a few times, it’s simply not credible to think all these situations can be resolved if armed people were about. It didn’t help Gabby Giffords or the other victims at that shooting.
In fact, that’s a great example. There were concealed handgun owners in Arizona. They did the responsible thing - not shoot. In the confusion, they couldn’t clearly identify the shooter, couldn’t determine if other people were accomplices or not, and had no confidence they could pick off a target without hitting innocent people.
But before they came forward, idiots like you were talking up the idea that a concealed weapon could have prevented or reduced the casualties. Obviously, in hindsight, that was not the case.
Plenty of people call BS on you in real life, so…
Tell us Mr. “in the security biz,” what’s the deal with security just generally speaking, at the Aurora Century 16? I mean there must be SOMETHING other than guns involved with all this - what other factors or issues can you see?
You know, being “in the biz” and all…
Exactly no different than the opposing viewpoint you and others in this thread convey.
Except that mine makes a difference. Yours just accepts the slaughter.
How does your fantasy make a difference?
You don’t know me “in real life”, so you pulled that one out of your ass.
Most franchised multiplex theaters(this one was a Cinemark theater) use contracted outside security, which usually consists of one or two guards switching between building and parking lot patrol every couple of hours or so. Sometimes the theater will have their own security/troubleshooter/ bouncer who the security officers report to, but sometimes they just report to whoever is the manager that shift. Sometimes the manager will pull a few moviegoers off to the side to offer them free movie tickets in exchange for keeping an eye out for people who try to record the movie on their cellphones. if they agree, they are given pagers and sent on their merry way.
My only advice to you Bob, if you are in fact carrying a Glock, is if you are afraid to use it when and if that unlikely day ever comes to you, the rest of the victims as well as yourself would probably be better off if you’d just left it at home.
Mine is the plausible cloth scenario Bob refers to. The ones where armored gunmen, frightened lunatics and gunshot victims indulge in disorderly chaos doing stupid stuff seems to be the preferred fantasy.
The difference is whether or not you believe force-on-force has a better ending, than well, what happened. Or as is claimed a bunch of gun happy lunatics end up killing even more people.
hmmm…
It gives him a hard-on, presumably.
It’s not a matter of being afraid to use it, asshat. Ever hear of a “straw man”?
It’s a matter of realizing that your first reaction should not be “let’s pull my gun out”. You come across as borderline psychotic about it, actually.
I see you conveniently ignored the example of the Arizona shooting of Rep. Giffords. I guess, according to you, the people there should have come out guns blazing, instead of doing what they actually did, which was responsibly deciding that using their handguns would have been the wrong move in their situation.
In your sick, delusional world, everybody is split into “victims” and “gun-owners who defend themselves”.
Here in the real world, lots of us are sane and intelligent enough to realize that most people fall between those extremes in “people smart enough to realize guns aren’t always the answer in a crisis situation”.
They’re both fantasies, so who gives a fuck? At least the disorderly chaos fantasy is plausible. Yours just makes you sound like a deluded asshole.
When somebody is shooting at me it is pretty close to the top of the list of reactionary activities. Quickly assessing the situation is always #1. Everything else follows. The fact that you seem to want to assume everything wrong about what someone thinks and does is pretty apparent. I won’t stoop to your level of name calling and just reiterate my advice - leave it at home if you either can’t or won’t use it when it’s called for.
This time it was called for. Too bad.
We actually had that - minus the bunch of gun-wielding lunatics with a penchant for blood and blatant disregard for the general populace. You know - the part being conveniently framed by the imaginative fantasizers such as yourself?
Or did you overlook that part of your so-called “plausible” scenario?