I'd rather take the chance of "might" rather than "none"
^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^
I always prefer my chances being armed than my chances being unarmed.
Further, I am disgusted by those that would attempt to deprive me of that decision.
I'd rather take the chance of "might" rather than "none"
^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^
I always prefer my chances being armed than my chances being unarmed.
Further, I am disgusted by those that would attempt to deprive me of that decision.
Realistically, its all situation dependent. The fact that he popped CS or OC canisters, with all the smoke clouding up and people running in a mass panic, you would have to make a command decision.
IF you were able to get to the right position, proper cover/concealment.
IF you were able to get a clear shot, realizing that he's wearing protection and no innocent people in the way.
IF you were able to withstand the effects of the CS or OC canister.
IF you had a proper light, weapon or handheld, to properly ID/distract him.
IF you were able to do all of this without being trampled.
Then, Yes, a LTCH holder could make a valid attempt to stop this incident. But there are so many factors, it's hard to tell what anybody would do. Except for maybe a combat veteran, who has already trained in these scenarios and/or been shot at. I would like to think that a LTCH holder could have make a difference and rise to the occasion, but under times of extreme stress, we all default to our highest level of training.
How many of us have been under the effects of CS/OC canisters? It gets hard to get a clear shot with tears in your eyes, snot dripping down your nose and alot of coughing. How many of us train under conditions this extreme?
I'm not trying to put any of us sheepdogs down, just pointing that there were so many variables and the probability of an innocent person getting caught in the crossfire of your weapon is extremely high as well. But, just having a LTCH holder there, increases the odds that there wouldn't be as many casualities.
Imagine multiple LTCH holders engaging simultaneously. I don't believe he would have continued with his attack. He wasn't expecting any resistance, he knew he was entering a GFZ.
to be fair, those people who did nothing, performed under stress exactly how they trained.
think about it.
Yeah sure, but who is going to volunteer to be the distraction aka bullet catcher in a situation like that?I never leave home without a Knife. I look at it as a tool, and a SD weapon, just like my pistol. All it would take is someone to distract him long enough for someone to take him down.
I fully expect a lawsuit againt the theater and Simon properties for their "no gun" policy. If that happens, maybe we will see fewer "no gun" signs in other places.
Mark
I have. It is scary. Folks are reliant on being protected and have ne real idea what to do in any violent confrontation.
They are trained and prepared, they all carried cell phones and knew how to use them.
Their training kicked in and they called 911 as soon as they felt their lives were in danger, and they waited for the police to show up.
If the would-be Kroger robber's Mom can sue, then Impossible is Nothing!Nice thought but will never happen.
I'd rather take the chance of "might" rather than "none"
They are trained and prepared, they all carried cell phones and knew how to use them.
Their training kicked in and they called 911 as soon as they felt their lives were in danger, and they waited for the police to show up.
There is a lot of debate here, what if's.
I know two things for certain:
1. Do nothing and 12 people die.
2. Its better to die fighting than to die on your knees like a sheep at slaughter.