Massive shooting in Colorado. Perp possibly used an AR

[Lorimor]

I imagine that there were few, if any, permit holders in the crowd that night.   A midnight showing of Batman, on a weeknight?  Most of us have sense enough to home in bed, sleeping 'cause we have responsibilities. 

It would be utter chaos in the theater to be sure.  Getting off a clear shot would have been difficult to say the least.  And the punk was heavily armored.  Tough, tough situation. 

[Dan W]

An eyewitness report says that the shooter may have had some inside help...

http://www.wkyc.com/news/article/252995/22/Witness-Someone-let-gunman-inside-Colorado-movie-theater-

[Policista]

I've heard at least one dozen interviews with those who stated that "he was three feet away" or "he was standing right next to me"
as he was firing into the crowd. If they were that close, I cannot understand why one of them did not attempt to physically engage the
shooter? If I had no concealled firearm available to return fire, my immenent death was a possiblity and an active shooter was that close,
I'd rather go down in a physical fight with the bastard than wait for him to kill me.

[bkoenig]

I've heard at least one dozen interviews with those who stated that "he was three feet away" or "he was standing right next to me"
as he was firing into the crowd. If they were that close, I cannot understand why one of them did not attempt to physically engage the
shooter? If I had no concealled firearm available to return fire, my immenent death was a possiblity and an active shooter was that close,
I'd rather go down in a physical fight with the bastard than wait for him to kill me.

I know that no one can predict how they'll react in a situation like that, but it seems like many people are just willing to lay down and die rather than fight back.  It's almost like the self preservation instinct has been bred out of us.

[HuskerXDM]

An eyewitness report says that the shooter may have had some inside help...

http://www.wkyc.com/news/article/252995/22/Witness-Someone-let-gunman-inside-Colorado-movie-theater-

I wonder if that was the shooter himself.  From what I read, he paid for a ticket, went in, then exited to get his gear, and reentered.  I've been away from news reports today, though, so that might be old info.

[Dan W]

I wonder if that was the shooter himself.  From what I read, he paid for a ticket, went in, then exited to get his gear, and reentered.  I've been away from news reports today, though, so that might be old info.

You may be right

[Mudinyeri]

I've heard at least one dozen interviews with those who stated that "he was three feet away" or "he was standing right next to me"
as he was firing into the crowd. If they were that close, I cannot understand why one of them did not attempt to physically engage the
shooter? If I had no concealled firearm available to return fire, my immenent death was a possiblity and an active shooter was that close,
I'd rather go down in a physical fight with the bastard than wait for him to kill me.

A fairly close friend of mine was in Von Maur during that shooting.  A man about 15' from her took a bullet to the torso and dropped to the ground.  She stood transfixed as the gunfire continued and the man's blood pooled onto the floor.  She can't remember how long she stood there simply staring at the man on the floor until it finally clicked in her brain to find concealment/cover.

When an event takes place and our mind has no frame of reference, it's virtually impossible to say what we will or won't do.  Unless you've been shot at before - probably multiple times - you may freeze, you may run away, you may run toward the gunfire.  You have no way of knowing.

I highly recommend reading Deep Survival - Who Lives, Who Dies and Why by Laurence Gonzales.  The book sheds a lot of light on scenarios like this one.

[JTH]

    And body armor...

Yes, the CS complicates things, but you can function in that environment.  I have.

Haven't the media reports now changed that to "smoke canisters" and a tac vest (not bulletproof, not a plate carrier?  Or is THIS new revision also incorrect)?  (I see that now they say a helmet and leg/arm protection---but say it is similar to SWAT, by which I'm thinking the leg/arm protection isn't ballistic in nature...?) 

Not saying that the situation wasn't difficult.  However, there is a significant difference between a room full of CS and a armored attacker, and a couple of smoke canisters and a guy wearing a vest with only two mag pouches who is wearing a gas mask making sure he can't aim well and has no peripheral vision.

I've lately run into the standard moron spouting that gun laws should be tightened, that "civilians with guns" wouldn't have made any difference, etc.

I was not pleased to hear their opinion.

My reply:
-----------------
You are certainly welcome to your opinion on what people could and could not do.

However, this does not make you correct, particularly if your facts are incorrect.

Early on, people talked about CS and tear gas, etc.  They talked about bulletproof vests.

NOW, we see that there were a couple of smoke canisters.  And a tac vest (which is not bulletproof). 

We hear about the attacker wearing a gas mask (which means he could barely see, had no peripheral vision, and would have had difficulty doing anything that required exertion and significant amounts of oxygen unless he had trained with it, which according to reports he couldn't have.  (He bought it too recently.)

With respect to defending themselves, you say:  "A civilian, absolutely not." {in the original comment, she said that maybe a military person used to immediate response could have made a difference---but a civilian?  Absolutely not.}

An absolute?  Absolute nonsense.

I am certainly not saying that anyone could have stopped him.  Nor am I saying that if only guns were allowed, he would have been stopped. If the theater had been self-defense friendly, that doesn't mean that anyone in it would have been doing so, and would have been able to respond.

However, it is certainly true that

1) I personally know _hundreds_ (closer to over a thousand) shooters who train more with their personal defense weapons than military and law enforcement does each year.

2) I personally know at least a hundred shooters _just in my local area_ who train more than military and law enforcement does. 

3) I know that oddly enough, law enforcement and the military are not the only categories of people who have experience and practice with dealing with physical behavior under stress.

4) I know that even without training, plenty of humans every year deal perfectly well under stress.

5) in the confines of a movie theater with a person killing everyone he possibly can, the situation is brutually simple.  It isn't a situation wherein a person plays a tactical chess game versus a skilled opponent, nor is it an ambiguous mess in which the rules of force applications are blurry.  In the theater, the people could:  Die.  Run.  Hide.  Fight.

And that's it.  If they died, or could run, problem solved for them.  If they couldn't, then they could only hide or fight.  And considering the attacker was very obvious (please don't try to tell me that a shooter firing multiple continuous rounds in a dark room is difficult to find---I know the situation can be visually and aurally confusing, but the confusion isn't WHERE the attack is coming from) --- people choosing to fight can indeed find the attacker.

In this theater no one did anything (according to witness reports) even when the attacker spent significant amounts of time reloading.  If you wish to take that as an argument that only military-trained people could have responded you may certainly make that your opinion.  I disagree strongly, but that's MY opinion.

However----the absolute statement that 

"...an armed *civilian* is going to have a chance of stopping him ... I think not" and " A civilian, absolutely not."

...is a load of crap.  (Oh---just a minor nitpicky detail of fact: law enforcement folks are civilians.)

In a personal comment, saying that an armed citizen may have been able to make a difference seems to me to be an obvious conclusion.  Not that it would have automatically fixed everything---might even have changed nothing at all if they had been shot early on.  But it seems OBVIOUS to me that an armed citizen in that theater, who had survived the attack, could indeed have made a difference.  Doesn't mean they would have.  But they certainly could have.

Or are you saying that off-duty law enforcement officers (who are allowed to carry when the rest of the citizens are regulated to be without self-defense tools) couldn't have made a difference either?
-------------------

The anti-defense people are already out in full swing. 

Which is interesting---considering the criminal piece of crap knew how to make bombs, we are lucky he was apparently a tactical idiot, too.  If he had simply made bombs and threw them all over the place, the death and injury toll would have been MUCH higher.  In terms of weapons apparently available to him, he actually chose the ones that would kill less people.

I'm glad he was a tactical idiot. 

I just wish someone there had the mindset and opportunity necessary to show him how bad he was.

[Dan W]

I just wish someone there had the mindset and opportunity necessary to show him how bad he was.

AMEN!

[Dan W]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/explosives-removed-from-james-holmess-apartment-and-destroyed-officials-say/2012/07/22/gJQAL9XN2W_print.html

The law enforcement source, who is close to the investigation but not authorized to speak publicly, said something went awry in the killer’s planned assault at the Century 16 theater during the midnight screening Friday of the Batman movie “The Dark Knight Rises.” Police said the alleged gunman had three weapons: a Remington shotgun, a Smith & Wesson M&P assault rifle, and a Glock 40-caliber handgun.

The semiautomatic assault rifle, which is akin to an AR-15 and is a civilian version of the military’s M-16, could fire 50 to 60 rounds per minute, and is designed to hold large ammunition clips. Holmes allegedly had obtained a 100-round drum magazine that attached to the weapon, the source said, but that such large magazines are notorious for jamming.

The law enforcement official said authorities believe Holmes first used the shotgun — some victims in the hospital have buckshot wounds — and then began using the assault rifle, which jammed. Then he resorted to the handgun.

[AAllen]

First I not only wish to agree with Dan's Amen but wish to add.  I spoke with a person from Aurora this week he lives just blocks from the theatre, in fact within walking distance.  He and his family go to movies there all the time, like most of us though he would not be at a midnight movie on a week night, he needs to go to work in the morning.  But the big point he made, he carries there all the time, and he knows others that do-legally.  The signs have no legal effect and are ignored by CCW holders.  What was missing is a person with the watchdog mentality, someone who has made the decision that they would fight.  The more I hear the more I come to believe that being armed would not have been necessary to stop this idiot.  All that would have been needed was a person that had made the decision that they would not be a victim.

[metaldoc]

   What was missing is a person with the watchdog mentality, someone who has made the decision that they would fight....

  ......  All that would have been needed was a person that had made the decision that they would not be a victim.

Exactly!   

 Hesitant to mix threads, but this highlights the discussion that took place in the story of the old man shooting the would be robbers at the internet cafe.  Some felt he reacted wrong.   

There may have been patrons in that movie theater who were carrying but were waiting for the 'right' moment. 

As Allen said, what was needed was someone WILLING to fight back.  Obviously, there were enough on hand that weren't.

[ALiesveld]

http://www.fox19.com/story/19104797/reality-check-unanswered-questions-about-colorado-theater-massacre

Interesting

[Mudinyeri]

Interesting

Cliff's Notes for those of us who can't watch videos at work?

[HuskerXDM]

Cliff's Notes for those of us who can't watch videos at work?

Dave's Notes:
Questions the national media should be asking:
1) Where did he get the money
2) Why did he rig is apartment to blow, then tell the police, then lawyer up and not say anything else to police
3) What about eyewitness reports that he had help

Instead of focussing on why guns are available in the first place...

[Policista]

It seems that taxpayers dollars may have funded the purchase of firearms and equipment.

Media sources are reporting that the National Institutes of Health had awarded him a $26K
stipend and paid his tuition at the University of Colorado in Denver.