I Hope You're Ready. I am.

Undeterred by how wrong they got the Columbine shootings 13 years ago, or how disgustingly politicized they turned Jared Loughner's 2011 rampage,

* ABC News reporter Brian Ross points a tentative finger at the Tea Party:

* Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) blames the opponents of Judeo-Christian theology:

* Northeastern University criminologist Jack Levin makes a clinical diagnosis and blames bullying:

* Ex-FBI profiler Clint Van Zandt on MSNBC says Holmes could be a "dark, Trekkie-like person."

* On CNN, profiler Pat Brown blames violent video games:

* The Daily Mail suspects Occupy Wall Street

http://reason.com/blog/2012/07/20/half-assed-media-speculation-about-the-b

Great, prescient observation.  I totally agree with you that little could have been done by a person armed with concealed carry pistol.  

Now, think a little more about that . . .

The GUN CONTROL crowd will say: "See, guns kill, lets prohibit them."

The 2nd Amendment Types will say: "A CCW would have stopped the gun fight or minimized the carnage, err, maybe."

The GUN CONTROL crowd will say: "[insert Number 47's argument here]."

The 2d Amendment Types will say: "Well, maybe this time . . ."

SEE!

It is a perfect set up argument to ram through total gun control.  

Too many coincidences for me.  It just so happened in Colorado, where Columbine occurred.  It just so happened to involve a weird psycho who used lawfully obtained and obtainable guns.  The psycho just happened to be wearing excellent gear which would have repelled any small arms fire.  It just so happened to occur in a darkened, smoke-filled, target-rich environment, for maximum carnage.  It just so happened to occur at a block-buster, mass media-watched and reported upon event.

Sure, there are counter arguments, but for me, looking past the obvious, I smell something far more sinister going on here.

When they announce a new gun control law in Colorado, remember you heard it here first.

You seem to care about puppets....

Silly you....

Mittens or Obama: who cares?

Gun-control makes about as much sense as theater-control.   If TPTB say control is the answer to stopping someone from killing others in a theater,  then I say that instead, they should outlaw everyone from going to theaters.

Though some here may disagree, you have a RIGHT to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.   Nothing in the Constitution gives you the RIGHT to feel safe in a theater.   (Just ask Abraham Lincoln.)

The government and law enforcement are not there to protect you.   Your protection is your own responsibility.   Hence the 2d Amendment. 

not Iranian made. All of them are imported from Russia which is known for building cheap, good and reliable rockets, so I think they actually want this conflict to escalate because Russians are eager to test their weapon systems in real war. Saddam didn't have an access to these modern technologies. He had only old Russian tanks and AKs
Iranians are a lot smarter and I believe this will not be a walk in the park for U.S.

They could have pumped rounds into his center of mass and kept on shooting.  A bullet-resistant vest doesn't protect you from being knocked over - you still get a lot of trauma and impact damage. 

Also: ballistic armor comes in different ratings. Armor that resists lower caliber rounds will fail against higher caliber handguns.

Also:  he was wearing body armor, not a personal energy shield.  His helmet would have protected no more than 80%  of his head.  Torso cover is typically excellent while in shooting position, but tactical *leggings* cover only about half the leg with a useful amount of Kevlar.  They are generally thin on the inside leg.

Tactical gloves are generally designed for hostile entry or against sharps and punctures - if he was able to fire a gun, his gloves could not have been thick enough to fully protect his hands against bullets.  If you fire enough shots you will find a poorly armored spot or even a gap, especially if you knock the guy down so he isn't moving.

His best defense wasn't his armor - but the same invisible shield that worked at Virginia Tech:  he chose an arena for his killing spree  where he knew no-one else would have a gun. 

Cinemark should be sued for denying Americans their CCW rights and turning them into a mass of defenseless targets. A single shooter might have saved a lot of lives.

  +1000

As I was reading the post, I thought "here is one of our blog's conspiracy theory dialecticians firing off a low probability scenario once again. Sure... anything could be possible. But then I looked to see who wrote it after noting that indeed I heard it here first, and to my surprise it is our blog's notable lawyer.  

You have got my attention. Ethos (street cred)  is the controlling factor in persuasion, according to Aristotle.

Then I go upstairs and wife (after watching the video of the 71yr-old hero) has several websites opened up to find out how to get a CCW permit. Her sister showed us her S&W Governor a few weeks ago. Looks like we are all headed to CCW school for some official training.

Stacking is not the only way to prep. And since our dry powder is getting scarce, some training just might be the thing.

I didn't know people had the right to not be offended. Wow, just wow.

Yes. Those were Sunburns that the two effeminate gentlemen in the video got so excited about.

If I were them, I'd go all-out on a first strike. It's how a US Col. defeated his bosses when they assigned him the Iranian role in a war game.

I am putting my fiat where my mouth is and purchased 2 calls Aug @ 55 strike in CORN  (corn ETF)

I am predicting a 3-4 gap up on monday morning.  

Now that you mentioned the Arizona incident where the congress women was shot. It was my understanding that a person in attendance at that event did have a CCW permit and had it gun on him. It was his bravery that kept more people from getting injured that day. I will have to follow up with details but I recall it was a Mexican American male (legally in this country-imagine that) that was the uncelebrated hero. I am guessing this part of the story was never circulated in the MSM because it did not promote a certain group's political agenda.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-dark-knight-rises-the-anti-occupy-wall-street-/

OP - "Tonight at the most prestigious theater chain in Hollywood, right in the heart of Hollywood on Sunset Boulevard, the legendary Arclight Theater, will screen the anti-Occupy Wall Street blockbuster "The Dark Knight Rises" no less than 15 times before 1 a.m. They can check out the 12:01 a.m. showing ..."

Reply - "It looks as if one of our own may have taken his protest too far.http://cheatersflorida.wordpress.com/2012/07/20/update-occupy-black-bloc-member-james-e-holmes-shoots-up-aurora-co-movie-theater-killing-12-and-wounding-50/"

His link looks cheesy. I just thought his comment interesting.

As previously pointed out, body armor is not a force field.  I have read several accounts by soldiers and police that were shot while wearing armor.  In most cases they were incapacitated for for at least several seconds.  And in a crowd you could likely get off a few shots while he was focused on someone else.

But 47 was right about the difficulty in not hitting an innocent target in a crowded and dark environment.  Even for someone that is well trained and well practiced this is a difficult situation to deal with.  Still, unless someone was in my direct line of fire, I would take the shot rather than seeing more people being murdered.

In my state the CCW training is mostly about laws and then you have to pass a shooting test.  It is not handgun training.  Your state may be different.  Training, practice, and more practice if you are going to carry.