Block is a California-based firearms safety trainer, certified by multiple branches of the federal government, with 29 years of experience. I called him because I'd just written about the differences between the Aurora shootings and other incidents, cited by Rep. Louie Gohmert, where armed civilians took out killers. The question I didn't really answer: How would an armed, trained person take out a gunman like James Holmes? Block was wondering the same thing. "All you need is one person there with a gun," he said. "If this went down in Texas or Arizona, he would have died quick."You don't have to look too far to ascertain that Greg Block has seen one Die Hard movie too many and is very, very full of horseshit.
There were members of the military in the theater, and possibly more people with training. There were, however, no guns, even though Colorado is a concealed-carry state because the Century theater where this took place was a "gun-free zone."
February 28, 1997, North Hollywood, California...
Or, if you prefer, the long version...
It took over 300 law enforcement officers and approximately 650 rounds to bring these two guys down.
Apparently it's very easy for some gunnies to be internet commandos, full of swagger and bravado. But the reality is far from the storybook endings these guys with an overflow of virtual manhood can ever imagine.
It's no wonder they inevitably gravitate to a political party that lost touch with reality and critical thinking years ago.
.
8 comments:
Respectfully, your dismissal of successful armed civilian defense against terror attacks is uninformed.
In 2007 in Colorado (what is it about that mountain air?) this principle was demonstrated when an armed member (a volunteer security guard) of a church stopped a rampage in progress:
http://articles.cnn.com/2007-12-10/us/colorado.shootings_1_gunman-security-guard-casings?_s=PM:US
Israel also has a long history of examples of armed civilians neutralizing armed terrorists. By "neutralizing," it is meant the terrorist is stopped from doing as much damage as intended (but certainly will claim some victims through the element of surprise).
It is impossible for anyone to predict an outcome, but it defies logic and experience to suggest that the *possibility* for reducing the number of casualties is not reduced when some of the members of an attacked pubic gathering are armed.
Anonymous,,,the North Hollywood shooters were heavily armored like the Aurora shooter. Your examples do not compare.
And do you really want the US to be like Israel?
Roger, respectfully we know very little about the brand and style of body armor involved, and I suspect you may be misinformed as to exactly what body armor does, and the fact that all body armor is not equal.
Generally speaking, body armor increases the chances of surviving a close range gun shot strike, but many styles are relatively ineffective at keeping the wearer immediately "in the fight." They also do not protect body parts such as the face, arms and legs. These are small targets indeed, but once hit they may reduce or eliminate the threat, notwithstanding the rest of the body covered in "armor".
As to your comment re: Israel, I don't understand your point. I can tell you one thing about the Israelis: they have not survived this long in the most hostile area of the world by taking a defeatist attitude or disarming themselves. Why uninformed Americans are so quick to rush to the conclusion that "nothing could be done" by other civilians in that theater is baffling to me.
He wore a ballistic helmet, a ballistic vest, ballistic leggings, a throat protector, a groin protector, and tactical gloves, according to reports.
And you maintain that a citizen throwing 10-20 rounds from a 9mm or .38 is going to have a chance against that through the smoke and panic?
Whatever you say, Anonymous.
Have you been to Tel Aviv, Anonymous? Have you walked the streets? I have. And I don't want South Beach to be anything like it.
"And you maintain that a citizen throwing 10-20 rounds from a 9mm or .38 is going to have a chance against that through the smoke and panic?"
Yes, especially if winning is defined as saving others' lives, not necessarily one's own. I suspect the concept of risking your life to save others is unappealing to you, which is fine, but recognize that many Americans feel otherwise. Some would engage the shooter and draw fire if it meant saving others.
Since you have not deviated from your ignorant understanding of body armor as immune from all of the physical forces of a gun shot, and provide no specifics of your criticism of Israel, feel free to have the last word but I won't be checking back at this blog.
May you live long and prosper.
I wish I would have had a chance to agree with Roger and added my 2 cents but, oh well....bye, Anon!
.
Anonymous there are so many assumptions in your post it's comical.
I wish I could live my lfe like that.
Been to Tel Aviv also. Very disconcerting to go into a drugstore or lunch spot and have an armed guard check my bag. Who wants to live like that?
Post a Comment
Spam, vulgar language, trolling and off-topic comments are not tolerated at SFDB and your comment will be removed if it meets this criteria.