bigdaddyhatty 65 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 I thought this was well done. Expresses a lot of my thoughts about the shooting. I really enjoy Gunblast.com http://www.gunblast.com/MakingtheShot.htm 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Darko 42 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Sure! At point blank range, when he was facing the other direction! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lone Eagle 839 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Nice article. I trained with LEO back in Alabama(called Basic Peace officers then, basically Police Reserves now) while doing security. Shooting on the move sounds easy, but for a novice is virtually impossible. Couple that with a dark theater, smoke/tear gas, screaming people, and your senses are overwhelmed. Not many can focus on tuning the "background noise" out in a tense situation. Since leaving there, I no longer have access to a "real world" shooting arena, and I'm rusty. Shooting stationary targets off a rest is one thing. Shooting a moving target returning fire opens up a whole new realm of reality. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rs51085 136 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Smart man. I totally agree. If I am going to die I want to have the best chance I can have to fight back whether it makes a difference or not. Boy scout moto is to always be prepared. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DogMan 2,343 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 As long as you are in a position where your rounds are more likely to hit the assailant than a bystander then it's worth it to try to take him out. We don't get to choose the scene or the circumstances, and those circumstances are never going to be perfect. You do the best you can and that's all you can do. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mogunner 240 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Many years ago when I was in the 7th Infantry, I pissed off the CO, which would come as no surprise to anyone that actually knew me back then. As a result of this, I was "volunteered" for every job, duty and exercise that he thought I would hate...or any that would interfere with my "civilian" life, which meant pretty much every thing that came across his desk. As a Combat Support Company, we often got calls asking for bodies to serve in all sorts of capacities, as aggressors in war games, as part of a general battle scenario or wherever someone had a certain number of body's that had to be present, they would request people from our company. One of these was a joint exercise between the Army Infantry, Navy Seals, and Marine Recon. Set up at Coronado Island, CA, it was a wide and varied (and insane we thought at the time) scenarios that the military or someone in Washington wanted a select bunch of troops trained in. One such event was assault on a large civilian aircraft with hostages. Sometimes we'd run into smoke inside, or tear gas, I think every scenario had at least 25 variations on it. We killed a LOT of freaking innocent people, I kid you not. But we got very good at making snap decisions and taking the shot when it was presented, or NOT taking it and hoping that another team member had a better angle than you did. We all found out that none of us was as good a shot as we thought we were, but were taught ways to become better. It was probably both the hardest two months I spent in the military, but also the more rewarding. I'm still a better shot at snap shooting than standing still, watching my breathing, squeeeeezing that trigger...drives me nuts, I just want to SHOOT...my main shooting buddy still shakes his head when I shoot down at his place. We always start with rifles, if its' one we already set the scope on we go for the targets out at 100 yards. Eventually we get down to pistols, usually shoot a few targets at 25 yards, then 50. He has a little over 10 acres, heavily wooded, and he'll hide the bright orange clay pigeons all over the places. We'll go for a walk and whenever we spot one, draw and fire on it. Since there's no telling where one will be, and he can't remember all the spots either, it makes for a decent enough "reactive" target range as he puts them at all different heights and angles. Supposed to go shooting out there on Sunday, but I have a new Traditions .50 BP rifle to sight the scope in on so hard telling if we'll have time for all that. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ktcm7271 999 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Hind sight is always 20/20, but I carry a razor sharp Spyderco always, and I practice knife katas. I probably would have tried to close distance and de-boned him. But you never know how you will act. (The thought of slicing him up gives me a weird sense of pleasure though). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GREYLUPO 358 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Maybe I could have and maybe I couldnt, but goddamnit I would have tried. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
csspecs 1,987 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 I'd say with a pistol I had practiced with I'd have a %60 chance of dropping him while remaining unharmed. %20 chance of dropping him while getting wounded, and the remaining would be the chances of being killed before making an effective shot. Odds of surviving the attack by running seem to be about %95 or better, I'm assuming between 200 and 400 people in the building. Your best chance would probably be dropping to the floor and then taking a shot from concealment. If your placement in the theater is Ideal your odds of eliminating the threat are probably more like %90 Either way I see it, pulling a firearm decreases your odds of survival as you make yourself a target. However you will likely cut the number of dead and wounded in half.. As it will buy them time to escape. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
patriot 7,197 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Maybe yes, maybe no. I wasn't there. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DrThunder88 912 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 It's hard to know if anyone could have intervened and achieved a most desirable outcome, but even a slightly less desirable outcome would be more desirable than the actual outcome. It seems less likely that someone carrying concealed would have made things worse compared with either making things better or having no effect. This leads me to believe that even an ineffective application of counterviolence would be better than none. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MT Predator 2,294 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Return fire on the spineless fuck would have tripped him up even if he wasn't killed immediately because of the soft armor IMO. Hits on soft armor is still going to break ribs, etc. Hits in his helmet if it were a ballistic helmet would still hurt him. The "armor" on his legs, throat, and arms were most likely riot gear for impact protection, not ballistic protection. They never verified whether or not the vest and helmet were ballistic armor or riot gear. You shoot until the threat stops shooting back, PERIOD. 9 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RED333 1,025 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Maybe yes, maybe no. I wasn't there. Same here, impossable to tell.I have never been trained is this type of shooting, When someone is shooting back. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MT Predator 2,294 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 The element of surprise which we called "Violence of Action" in the Military, eliminates the other guy's advantage because you are shooting back at the fucker so he isn't the only one shooting. He may have returned fire, he may have curled up in a ball on the floor. Wierd shit happens in a firefight. Military and LEO training is designed to make your actions a reactive response to everything that is happening instead of a scripted type plan which goes to shit when things don't follow the script. I believe this guy had a scripted plan and had his plan went to shit, (someone returning fire), his actions would have been different and more lives would not have been lost that night. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DogMan 2,343 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 As long as we're asking hypothetical questions, try this one: Would it have been a better or worse outcome if someone had shot and killed the gunman before he had a chance to fire a shot, however the armed citizen has to fire six quick rounds to do it and kills two other people in the process? Remember, nobody will ever know that he WOULD have killed twelve and wounded fifty. Is it a better outcome? I say yes. Maybe not for the guy who kills the two people and the gunman but the overall outcome is still much, much better. And my point is that when some asshole puts innocent people in this situation sometimes there isn't an easy and clean answer. People just have to do the best they can and ANY blood shed is on hands of the aggressor and his alone. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MT Predator 2,294 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 People just have to do the best they can and ANY blood shed is on hands of the aggressor and his alone. I agree! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G O B 3,516 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Laser grips. Most of us are no freaking operator. Hell some of us couldn't run if we wanted to. Put the laser on the problem. Bang Bang -laser off and MOVE -duck - roll -fall down. Just do not be exactly where you were. Visually acquire problem and repeat. Repeat until no longer necessary or you run out of ammo or die. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
unclejake 428 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 (edited) As of this moment, my carry guns do not have a laser as they have no mount. My wife's Rossi 357 has a grip laser. But I will be doing research into a small carry pistol w/laser. My "always" gun is a Kel-Tek P32. I qualified for my CWP with it and outshot people shooting 6"barreled S/W .22 revolvers. It is very accurate, but does not have a rail. Looks like I've gotta change my next purchase. I was going to be getting a Khar CW45 next month, but they have no rails either, and that sucks, cause it is a sweet pistol! I do have a Ruger SR9, but it is on loan to my sister at the moment. Edited July 28, 2012 by unclejake Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Voltia 375 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Assuming a 25 yard shot to the front of a theater, rested off a seat back, with a .357.....maybe. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rs51085 136 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 This situation makes me wonder if an FN 5.7 pistol would have been the answer. They are very accurate and suposidly defeat body armor with the right ammo. That would have made any hit to his body a good one... They are pretty small for a full size gun. This is making me rethink my glock 26 for my carry gun. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
brandon402 86 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 Good points, and I really want that flag he has at the end.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bayoupiper 738 Posted July 28, 2012 Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 As a retired LEP, I'd like to think I've learned a few things. Like not engaging a heavily armed and armored assailant with an LCP. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bigdaddyhatty 65 Posted July 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 28, 2012 As a retired LEP, I'd like to think I've learned a few things. Like not engaging a heavily armed and armored assailant with an LCP. Carry something bigger than a LCP Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bayoupiper 738 Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 (edited) I do when I feel the need. Like going down to New Orleans and on road trips. I carry a S&W 4566 on those occasions. But keeping with the topic, I would have to have the "perfect shot" to take that dude on. Edited July 29, 2012 by Dancing Bear 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
theorangeplanet 968 Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 (edited) This situation makes me wonder if an FN 5.7 pistol would have been the answer. They are very accurate and suposidly defeat body armor with the right ammo. That would have made any hit to his body a good one... They are pretty small for a full size gun. This is making me rethink my glock 26 for my carry gun. Like the other thread that brought this up, by switching to a firearm that might be effective against armor you're giving up the capability to use large caliber defensive rounds like a .45 or 9mm +P hollowpoints which will undoubtedly be more effective against unarmored foes... which is 99.99% of all defensive shootings (rough guess-timate). Edited July 29, 2012 by Risky 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chrisdeavers 10 Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 i must say i have an internal laser on my xd 40 subcompact. it was made for aiming in the dark. i could have made "the" shot and quite a few more as long as my line of sight was clear. movie theatres are angled down toward the front, so i feel my odds would have been pretty good. plus, i usually choose a seat somewhere in the middle elevation so my neck doesn't get crinked. so that would have given me a minute to see the action, activate the laser, and put the dot on him while i squeezed off ten rounds. at least a few, probably most, would have hit center mass. thats my take. not to mention the theatre was smack dab in the middle of a "gun free zone" complete with signs posted everywhere. talk about a neon sign for mass murder. let that be a lesson. never take your family to any business inside a "gun free zone". for the record, i am ex infantry and have had plenty of mout training. (military operations in urban terrain) 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dad2142Dad 6,559 Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 Nice article. Couple that with a dark theater, smoke/tear gas, screaming people, and your senses are overwhelmed. Not many can focus on tuning the "background noise" out in a tense situation. Since leaving there, I no longer have access to a "real world" shooting arena, and I'm rusty. Shooting stationary targets off a rest is one thing. Shooting a moving target returning fire opens up a whole new realm of reality. OK I am not an operator. However I do not let myself get into the movie, unless I am at home. Real world I would have no problem bull rushing and using my LCP at close range. Unless the perp is well trained itself, most people cannot handle a bull rush. You may think I am a nut, but I refuse to just go down like a cow. Now the CC in Aurora is an issue, would still bull rush with a pig sticker. Do not let anyone take you down without a fight. Learned that some 40 years ago, still holds true today. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bayoupiper 738 Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 (edited) Jeezus! Edited July 29, 2012 by Dancing Bear Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MT Predator 2,294 Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 The thing is, it was dark in the theater so how do you determine whether or not he is wearing armor or a load bearing vest to take this so called "perfect shot"? Like I said, hits on soft armor are still going to hurt him. Hits on a ballistic helmet are still going to have an effect. It's not like the guy is sitting in a concrete bunker looking out a 3 inch slit. If a controlled pair to the torso doesn't stop the threat, follow up to the head. That's why most reputable trainers will have you shooting failure drills. Carry enough ammo so you can stay in the fight as well. It still blows my mind some people will CCW something like a LCP with nothing but the magazine in the pistol. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
patriot 7,197 Posted July 29, 2012 Report Share Posted July 29, 2012 The thing is, it was dark in the theater so how do you determine whether or not he is wearing armor or a load bearing vest to take this so called "perfect shot"? Like I said, hits on soft armor are still going to hurt him. Hits on a ballistic helmet are still going to have an effect. It's not like the guy is sitting in a concrete bunker looking out a 3 inch slit. If a controlled pair to the torso doesn't stop the threat, follow up to the head. That's why most reputable trainers will have you shooting failure drills. Carry enough ammo so you can stay in the fight as well. It still blows my mind some people will CCW something like a LCP with nothing but the magazine in the pistol. Good thoughts. Hits are still hits. That said, has anyone noticed the sheer number of Chairborne Rangers on this thread? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.