Philip on TV with Lori Haas talking about Gun Free Zones

[Grapeshot]

I'll make it but I need a knife wielding actor. Maybe someone that looks the part...I wonder what happened to Sh*****?

Shhh - been seen, just not heard.

In an active shooter scenario, the reaction is fight or flight and the former is training dependent.

Absent the tools to return fire, the choice was made for the theater goers. We should/must have the ability to decide for ourselves whether to give up that right or not.

Perhaps it is time to revisit the thought of "quasi-public" establishments. That pertains to a private business/commercial enterprise inviting the public to enter shall be treated as a public facility. There are already special laws i.e. zoning, construction standards, and yes safety that exceed those of private/residential properties. I submit that no "quasi-public" facility/business should be able to restrict my right to carry any more than they should be able to say no red shirts - yah, I know, I know.

 

[Grapeshot]

I'm trying to figure out why folks think that because someone has a CHP or is open carrying, it's their responsibility to charge in and take on the armed horde to protect all those people in the theatre.
If someone has a CLEAR shot, game on.

I carry to protect me and mine.
If others choose to dial and wait, more power to them.

Understand that defense of others is not a requirement. Some even recommend against it for valid reasons or at least offer extreme caution. In some cases (as this one) there is little doubt who the BG was and he wasn't going to be stopped easily.

Could I have defaulted to let Mikey do it - I don't think so. I'm not wired that way. No criticism intended to those that chose to limit their involvement as much as possible - sometimes the better part of a good defense is leaving, but many factors complicated that. Lots of details not known and I wasn't there.

It's about choices, ladies and gentlemen. That's something the victims did not have once they entered that theater. That is the biggest tragedy of all and it will be repeated until we can have the option, the choice, to do something about it as LACs. Responsibility for our safety begins and ends with each of us. Our responsibility to our fellow man lies within our hearts.

I say, "No more." The buck must stop here. End this needless cycle of waste.

 

[peter nap]

Understand that defense of others is not a requirement. Some even recommend against it for valid reasons or at least offer extreme caution. In some cases (as this one) there is little doubt who the BG was and he wasn't going to be stopped easily.

Could I have defaulted to let Mikey do it - I don't think so. I'm not wired that way. No criticism intended to those that chose to limit their involvement as much as possible - sometimes the better part of a good defense is leaving, but many factors complicated that. Lots of details not known and I wasn't there.

It's about choices, ladies and gentlemen. That's something the victims did not have once they entered that theater. That is the biggest tragedy of all and it will be repeated until we can have the option, the choice, to do something about it as LACs. Responsibility for our safety begins and ends with each of us. Our responsibility to our fellow man lies within our hearts.

I say, "No more." The buck must stop here. End this needless cycle of waste.

In typical Grapeshot fashion......Thems the facts!
It isn't just theory with GS either given his latest adventure backing up the local cops (and many things before).
Some climb the mountain, others just look at pictures of it!:dude:

 

[OC4me]

"A shoot-out is better than a massacre!" - David M. Bennett

 

[Shovelhead]

Understand that defense of others is not a requirement. Some even recommend against it for valid reasons or at least offer extreme caution.

I understand.... the 'folks' I was refering to are the talking heads with a microphone on the evening news.
The ones that seem to think that anyone with a gun in that theatre would go on a spray and pray mission.
Sorry for not being clearer.

 

[MSC 45ACP]

Wishful thinking I'm afraid, but it will sure get their attention and likely get them to stop what they were doing, even if just for a brief period.

+1

 

[Grapeshot]

Originally Posted by BillB

Wishful thinking I'm afraid, but it will sure get their attention and likely get them to stop what they were doing, even if just for a brief period.

+1

A hammer blow to the chest, makes concentrating on anything else somewhat difficult.

A steady staccato of such is exceptional punctuation to your desire to stop the BG. Under these circumstances some would be closing the distance (moving forward). Something to think about - turns the tables totally.

One thing is for sure - it beats the h*ll out of throwing popcorn and trying to dig a hole in concrete.

 

[MSC 45ACP]

Yeah, the BG bought a tactical vest. Those are worn OVER everything else.
When a Kevlar vest is worn, it is usually worn UNDER everything else except a t-shirt...

{Everyone has heard of UnderArmor, but does everyone know that it started just as the name implies?
We were issued UnderArmor T-shirts to wear Under Body Armor in the early-mid 90's.
They were lightweight and not made of cotton. They were made of some sort of space-age stuff
that "wicks" the perspiration away from the body. They only came in white.
They didn't have that fancy-looking logo, either.
I looked up the history of the company and it says something about a college football player.
Maybe the stuff we had was just a Lycra (or whatever they were) shirt, but I've gone WAY OT...}

Back to my original entry: Layers worn by LEO...
Lycra t-shirt
Level 3A body armor
Uniform shirt or coveralls
LE Belt with suspenders (similar to a tactical vest, but not really...)
PFD
SAR Vest (contains signal flares, EPIRB, strobe light, sheath knife and signal mirror)

Thats about enough crap.
My point is that he could have been (and probably was) wearing body armor
AND a tactical vest with mag pouches and other goodies.

Is there someone that thinks you can only wear one or the other?
Silly...

 

[Aknazer]

It is possible that the shooter had on body armor. But it is also very possible that he didn't. There are plenty of tactical vests that don't have to be worn over body armor. Them saying "tactical vest" makes me believe there no actual body armor was used, and he simply had on a vest to better hold his various magazines and what not. Though given just how shoddy reporting has become lately, it is still completely possible that he had on body armor under the tactical vest and it just wasn't mentioned. But going off of just what was reported (dangerous, I know), I would would say he most likely didn't have on actual body armor.

 

[va_tazdad]

Time to awke up and remember history!

Days after the mass shootings in Colorado, White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama still supports a ban on the sale of assault weapons, a restriction that expired in 2004.

What the anti-gun supporters fail to remember is that America was founded by men who owned "assault weapons" of the day back in 1776.

How do they think this country came into existence? By men who owned guns!

If you witness a crime being committed against an anti-gun supporter, DO NOT use your gun to assist or intercede. We MUST respect their rights even if they don't respect ours!

;>)

 

[supranite90]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWsJo7bMvNE&feature=g-u-u

This pretty much hit it on the head for what I think about the terms the media uses. Gun Gripes Episode 34

 

[Old Virginia Joe]

What the anti-gun supporters fail to remember is that America was founded by men who owned "assault weapons" of the day back in 1776.

How do they think this country came into existence? By men who owned guns!;>)

You have just reminded us of a sad point that I have had to face and accept, with disgust. These libtards do not celebrate that our independent (from Great Britain) country was established at all! These are modern-day Tories, who think it was terrible that we revolted against the Mother country, so pointing out how our USA was founded by men with guns who fired them at British soldiers hold no weight with them. Once you realize, this, you realize it does no good to point this out to them. Of course, they enjoy today all the benefits of those "men with guns" of 1775, and since, but they don't regard them highly. Do you see? Can I get an "Amen?"

 

[Old Virginia Joe]

Back to my original entry: Layers worn by LEO...
Lycra t-shirt
Level 3A body armor
Uniform shirt or coveralls
LE Belt with suspenders (similar to a tactical vest, but not really...)
PFD
SAR Vest (contains signal flares, EPIRB, strobe light, sheath knife and signal mirror)

PFD ?! Why would he be wearing a Personal Flotation Device? Expecting a flash flood or very high tide?

 

[peter nap]

..

 

[skidmark]

I see what you did there. [/golf clap]

stay safe.

 

[peter nap]

I see what you did there. [/golf clap]

stay safe.

I was being the new tolerant Peter Nap. I almost posted this::uhoh:

In your pm box

 

[MSC 45ACP]

PFD ?! Why would he be wearing a Personal Flotation Device? Expecting a flash flood or very high tide?

Thanks for the laugh, PeterNap...

Joe... you DO remember what I used to do, right? I was saying what I used to wear... not every other LEO around. Just what we wore when doing LE...
C'mon man... YOU DO remember that conversation, right?



mike

 

[peter nap]

Thanks for the laugh, PeterNap...


mike

I enjoyed it Mike but I think I sharpened the point a little too much with that joke.

 

[MSC 45ACP]

nawwwwwwwww....

 

[Old Virginia Joe]

Thanks for the laugh, PeterNap...

Joe... you DO remember what I used to do, right? I was saying what I used to wear... not every other LEO around. Just what we wore when doing LE...
C'mon man... YOU DO remember that conversation, right?



mike

Yeah, Mike, get me straight. I forgot.