If 18deltasf had been there unarmed, he would have taken the guys gun from him and used it on him, twice.
I don't think it was by "request" that the theater owners banned armed patrons. If there is no law prohibiting being armed in such venues, then it was their free choice. Be it law or corporate policy, it is ineffective and dangerous.
I'm not familiar with Colorado's gun laws. Is there a penalty for ignoring a property owner's prohibition on carrying arms?
Woody
Hell,... he would have handled the situation by muscle flex and beards alone.
Well, you sure ofended me, you internet commando. You have no idea what the **** you are talking about. I bet your exceptionally crass comments would make those who did their best in there in the midst of all that chaos feel real freakin' good; ass-hat. I sure hope you don't have an SDA license; you are a disgrace to the OSA community. You are dismissed. Now slink away on your belly, like a reptile. That is all.
Well, this is an entertaining thread. I'll give it that!
Yeah, it's easy to second guess and monday morning quarterback when all the dust settles. It's a lot harder to make decisions when the SHTF and someone is trying to kill you. I think everyone can agree how horrible this event was. This was an planned ambush, and the assailant had all of the advantages and preparation. The immediate action drill in response to finding yourself in an ambush is to get clear of the kill zone. Unfortunately, in this instance, he was concentrating fire on the avenues of escape. A truly horrible situation to find yourself in. This guy needs to go to the chair.
I guess Im not afraid to say this, but in the situation...
#1 is my kids and wife
#2 is me
The rest of you are just in my way, and I would happily sit in a cell on manslaughter for collateral damage if it meant getting my wife and offspring out. Sorry, I ain't a hero. I'm only out to preserve my genetic contribution to this world.
If 18deltasf had been there unarmed, he would have taken the guys gun from him and used it on him, twice.
True.
But the responses have raised another valid point: the definition of hero. As I was using it, I meant in terms of neglection of personal thought to save others. While I agree that it is great for people to try and save family members, etc., that is pretty much what I think most would do. Therefore, as I was trying to use the term 'hero' I mean someone willing to go above and beyond what an average person would do, to be willing to put the wellbeing of complete strangers above their own. Maybe there is a better term I could use?
I just can't imagine saying that sacrificing your own life for a loved one isn't heroic.
10, it sounds like you think having a firearm means that you MUST USE IT.
It is in poor taste to make judgements after a tradgedy like this.
Enter your email address to join: