Home / Gun Ownership / What If 20% of Adults in That Theater Had Been Packing Iron?
Print Friendly and PDF

What If 20% of Adults in That Theater Had Been Packing Iron?

Written by Gary North on July 23, 2012

I have a question.

If 20% of the adults in that Colorado theater had been armed with a handgun and trained in its use, how many people would have died in addition to the shooter?

I think the answer is clear: fewer.

The reason why so many died is that 99% of the people in that theater were unarmed. There was only one exception.

I offer a proposition:

“Armed and dangerous” is an inescapable concept. There is no such thing as “unarmed and safe.” There is only the question of which person or group is armed and dangerous.

It would have been far better if 100% of the adults in that theater had been armed and trained. But we must be reasonable in our assumptions. We cannot expect 100% of any large group to get trained in the use of a handgun. But 20% is reasonable.

The reason why we do not have 20% of our population armed and trained is because the culture of gun control is dominant. There is a stigma for people to carry a weapon. It begins early.

SCHOOL DAYS

This stigma begins in tax-supported schools. It begins in an environment in which unarmed people are forced into a government-controlled environment for 8 hours a day.

Within a few years, students learn that bullies get their way, that bullies are not expelled, that the system favors bullies. The victims learn that nothing can protect them. They learn that self-defense is regarded as a violation of the law, that self-defense is regarded as immoral and uncharitable. The student who fights back is as likely to be punished as the bully.

The system therefore favors bullies. The victims learn that bullies run the show, despite bureaucrats who promise justice on campus. Bullies know how to work the government’s system of sanctions. They have nothing to lose. The victims — the productive members of the school system — have a lot to lose. They learn meekness. They learn submission.

This is what tax-funded education is designed to produce: a mentality of submission.

This is high school in Back to the Future. This is music to the ears of the Biffs of this world.

At graduation, the victims take the culture of disarmament with them. So do the bullies, who know that their victims are now psychologically trained not to fight back.

The victims place their hope in this: the randomness of bullies in the general population. “The other guy will be a victim. I will escape.”

Inner-city males know better, which is why they are more likely to carry guns than males in the suburbs. But no one trains them in the use of these guns. The police pretend, as teachers pretended, that bullies are under control.

A handgun in your holster makes a statement: “The police cannot protect us. The state cannot protect us.” This is correctly regarded as an insult to the bureaucrats who run the state — an assertion of their failure to protect law-abiding citizens. Hence, bureaucrats favor gun control. Gun control does not protect the population, nor is it intended to. What gun control does is simple: it does keep the evidence of the state’s failure from becoming widespread. It keeps voters disarmed and dependent on the state.

Bottom line: it keeps adults in “school” until the day they die.

A dozen if them died in that theater. That is the price they paid for the culture of disarmament.

This is the state’s position: “Better a dozen dead people in a theater than an armed population.”

?

To read the rest of my article, click the link. It gets meaner.

Continue Reading on

Print Friendly and PDF

Posting Policy:
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

111 thoughts on “What If 20% of Adults in That Theater Had Been Packing Iron?

  1. This was not like a school shooting. Most people would see it as a planned stunt. When the tear gas hit, you would be surprised and disoriented. It would be over before you could respond

  2. PaulthePatriote says:

    No matter what, unfortunately, anyone "packing heat" licensed and authorized to carry [except a police officer] would be prosecuted by the liberal media and justice department. No matter if he/she would have saved 1 life or one . . . he/she would be prosecuted for carrying a weapon in a public place, possibly prosecuted for manslaughter. No matter what, the liberals are out voicing the Rebublic citizen who only wants to do what is right and to fend his/her friends and family. They want our guns and will use the Colorado incident or even will use the one who defends the public against such an act. Unless those who consider themselves to be a Republic citizen needs to start standing up as loud and clear as any liberal! God Save America!!!!!

  3. PaulthePatriot says:

    That is suppose to be "1 life or 100 lives . . . " Sorry!

  4. I am not so sure of that. If you were trained to handle a hand gun I am sure you would be given different problems to work in and shown how to handle them in a efficient and safe manor.
    It like a policy for an attorney. You may never need it but someone else will cause you to need and attorny.
    Be sides if this Government tries to take our guns there may be a blood bath in the making.
    The guns will not go quietly.

  5. The correct answer would be between 50 and 100 dead and 200 to 500 wounded and 2 or 3 law officers. When everybody starts packing there will be less control instead of more. In a society what has little self-control and respect for life it is inevitable.

  6. The theater policy prevents what you describe. According to those at the scene, the theater chain's policy is not to allow and CCW in any state. According to a Colorado LEO the state law does NOT prohibit someone from carrying legally anywhere except certain federal buildings and school areas (and there are exceptions to those). The city & county of Denver has its own permit system and it is very hard to get a CCW permit.
    The theater, according to the LEO, like any business, cannot prevent you from carrying your legal weapon. As for any other reason, a business can ask you to leave the premises for any reason. To refuse to do so would be trespass, and they could then call the police to remove you. Since you have a firearm, even legally, other problems can result.
    So the theater policy effectively disarmed all the people attending that show, and the perp apparently KNEW that, since he had this all planned out. So what the author here says is true. We have been made to be accustomed to being subservient to those who find disarming us is more convenient and easier. It is better to let the insurance company pay damages than to allow a hodge podge of idiot civilians to carry guns to protect themselves.
    So did this change their policy? NO, they now tell patrons that they cannot 'dress up' in costumes when they come to the theater – of course THAT would have averted this tragedy – right?
    I hope this circulates and people find out about the 'theater policy' and sue the hell out of the theater & chain.

  7. I also would like to say if it wasn't for the gun our for fathers could not of secured our freedom from the English, Many would have not had food to feed their children and families. It is nuts to try to take them away. I would not like to be the one to come to a rednecks home and say bubba give me your gun. I sure you would have a big problem doing that.
    The first one to go would be the ones who are pushing this. Secrete Service better ware armor. Those would be first on the hit list.
    This Congress better wake up.and smell the roses, Or the roses may be planted on them.

  8. Closed circuit video of the difference one armed (and trained) citizen can make: a dozen lives saved instead of a dozen lives lost.

  9. What you say is true in many places, but Colorado has a Concealed Carry Law, and those with licensed handguns could have been carrying.
    . According to those at the scene, the theater chain's policy is not to allow and CCW in any state. According to a Colorado LEO the state law does NOT prohibit someone from carrying legally anywhere except certain federal buildings and school areas (and there are exceptions to those). The city & county of Denver has its own permit system and it is very hard to get a CCW permit.
    The theater, according to the LEO, like any business, cannot prevent you from carrying your legal weapon. As for any other reason, a business can ask you to leave the premises for any reason. To refuse to do so would be trespass, and they could then call the police to remove you. Since you have a firearm, even legally, other problems can result.
    So the theater policy effectively disarmed all the people attending that show, and the perp apparently KNEW that, since he had this all planned out. So what the author here says is true. We have been made to be accustomed to being subservient to those who find disarming us is more convenient and easier. It is better to let the insurance company pay damages than to allow a hodge podge of idiot civilians to carry guns to protect themselves.
    So did this change their policy? NO, they now tell patrons that they cannot 'dress up' in costumes when they come to the theater – of course THAT would have averted this tragedy – right?
    I hope this circulates and people find out about the 'theater policy' and sue the hell out of the theater & chain.

  10. I also would like to say if it wasn't for the gun our for fathers could not of secured our freedom from the English, Many would have not had food to feed their children and families. It is nuts to try to take them away. I would not like to be the one to come to a rednecks home and say bubba give me your gun. I sure you would have a big problem doing that.

  11. I disagree, An armed society will soon become a more self controlled and civil society, because the concequences of being other than polite and courteous are much more drastic. You remove the advantage the bully, mob, or thug has when you arm properly trained citizens.

  12. John C. Bossolt says:

    I have been thinking of this scenario all weekend: what if…

    What if one brave soul had been packing heat?

    Would he or she have had the opportunity to use deadly force?

    Would the "stunt" deception neutralize any retaliation by buying time for the shooter?

    Would the gas have precluded a deadly response?

    Would the certain threat of prosecution of such a hero have been a deterrent to his or her intervention?

    Wouldn't it have been sweet if the hellbound creep had been wasted after just one or two shots? Maybe next time.

  13. huey6367 says:

    "The reason why so many died is that 99% of the people in that theater were unarmed. There was only one exception."

    Does that mean one person in that theater had a gun? It wasn't explained well in the article. The article seemed to be more a rant on the education system.

    So let's assume one person did have a weapon in the theater that night. Why didn't they use it?

  14. He didn't have or use tear gas, he had a couple of smoke bombs. Yes, it would have been difficult to take him out in a crowded, darkened room, but even a body shot would have stopped the shooting (not killed him, but few can stand when shot even with body armor and the pain/broken ribs associated).

  15. you need to go and do a little more research on what you just said I myself carry a weapon and will do what I need to do to protect myself , my family and anyone who needs help it's people like you who live in some make believe world and think the police are going to protect you have a serious problem and I personally do not want you putting a target on my back when I go some place that is public!!!

  16. Riggs 81 says:

    sound to me like you need to examine Chicago, NYC and Washington DC. Three of the locations that have essentially outlawed guns. What do they all have in common. A murder rate that is staggering. Now look at places that allow concealed carry by trained citizens. VIolent crime has reduced, murder rate is down and the streets are becomming safer. Ocala Florida, Armed 71 y/o man defends internet cafe in armed robbery attempt, he shoouts the 2 assailants nocharges. Why? because he responded with lethatr force to a Felony in progress. Please remember when seconds count, the Police are minutes away.

  17. Riggs 81 says:

    Sounds to me like you need to examine Chicago, NYC and Washington DC. Three of the locations that have essentially outlawed guns. What do they all have in common. A murder rate that is staggering. Now look at places that allow concealed carry by trained citizens. VIolent crime has reduced, murder rate is down and the streets are becomming safer. Ocala Florida, Armed 71 y/o man defends internet cafe in armed robbery attempt, he shoouts the 2 assailants no charges. Why? because he responded with lethal force to a Felony in progress. Please remember when seconds count, the Police are minutes away.

  18. This 'urban legend' of a wild west with carnage everywhere is utter nonsense and not backed up by one iota of evidence. The evidence (i.e. peer reviewed studies) shows that criminal armed violence stops within seconds of the "2nd gun" being brought into play (i.e. via an armed citizen or the 1st police officer on scene). At worst, the criminal has to focus on the person giving return fire and so innocent victims stop being the targets. In addition, criminals rarely practice shooting and so are terrible shots, unlike armed citizens who have training and practice.

  19. Had 20% of the people in the theater been packing a gun, there would not have been a single shot fired because the Holmes scum would have known he would be mowed down the moment he opened fire and his plan would not succeed. He would either have dumped his theater plan and gotten a job or worked on a new plan. Maybe, enter a church or hospital where guns are not allowed.

  20. Well this germ, planned this, it was not random or an off the cuff thing. There are some problems with carrying a firearm. 99.99% of the time they say holstered. Most would not shoot enough to stay proficient i.e. the gentleman in Florida, missed more that he hit and what hits he made were poor hits. That being said, its a huge responsibility and in a culture that teaches these days that almost no matter what you are not responsible for your own actions and decisions, it becomes a huge problem of itself. The problem in that theater was nobody was willing to take on that responsibility except for three men that took bullets for their girl friends at the cost of there own lives. Seems to me that there are still some men around. Unless you are willing to take on this responsibly, its better you not carry a firearm, It would do you little good in a fight. But If you are willing to, and spend the time on the range every week along with the expense and the just plan pain in the back side of carrying a fire arm really is, then you should, and further more you should not have to ask anybodies permission to exercise the right you have to do so. I will say this If he even thought that there was the possibility of him getting a bullet in his head the second he started, he would have never gone in that theater, you see he is nothing but a coward and like all bullies , they don't ever subject themselves to such a risk. Let alone a fair fight.

  21. Habeas is a product of the very disarmament culture Dr. North writes against. That view of a society modeled on "Shootout at the OK Corral" comes from watching too many westerns at the cineplex and on TV growing up. Hollywood fostered that indelible image of a lawless frontier because so many workers with deserting east coast cities for more freedom and opportunity out west, the money interests were trying to stem the tide with negative imagery through movies.

    Cowboys packed heat for many perfectly mundane reasons: bagging dinner, killing rattlesnakes and, even, shooting a runaway horse that might have dragged them to death with their boot hooked in a stirrup.

  22. GunFreeZones HaHaHa says:

    This is Funny. This is EXACTLY what I said to a freind yesterday. Had there been 25% in the audience with CCW licenses. There would have been many more live people and many more without injuries. So called "Gun Free Zones" only give comfort to a killer. Think about it, if you are a nut and you want to kill a bunch of people do you go to a police station? No, there are people there with guns. So where do you go? To a "Gun Free Zone", schools, and any business that puts up the sign; a gun with cross through it. This sign basically says, only criminals will be carrying guns in this business…..REAL SMART! It is safer to stay away and don't do business with those businesses that have those signs up.

  23. GunFreeZone HaHaHa says:

    He did Huey6367, he killed and injured many people.

  24. GunFreeZone HaHaHa says:

    Actually the correct answer would be, IT WOULDN'T HAVE TAKEN PLACE AND HAPPENED AT ALL. If the guy knew there were 20% in attendance with guns, he would have stayed away and found a "Gun Free Zone" for his carnage.

  25. That one person did use it!

  26. Indeed. And cowboys were a rather civil bunch, with homicides being extremely rare. Towns needed to start hiring Sheriffs when their citizens began to disdain carrying firearms themselves and wanted protection from criminals who came to town on occasion. Even then it only worked in tiny towns where once could see from one end of THE street to the other.

  27. GunFreeZone HaHaHa says:

    I agree. Those in attendance should sue the Theatre for not allowing the CCW holders to carry inside. That sign that tells CCW holders that they can't carry inside, is an INVITATION for killers because they KNOW they are the only ones armed and can come in and kill without concern that anyone can stop them….I agree, those business's that have those signs up are dangerous places to be. Disarming the CCW holders anything can happen, just as those folks that thought they were only going to the movies, not to their death.

  28. I love what John Lott (renowned expert in gun crime and gun legislation) said the other night on Sun News in Canada (we had our own multiple shooting incident in Toronto last week). He said that liberal gun-grabbers know the truth about armed citizens deterring crime but won't admit it because it doesn't suit their agenda. He said to prove it just ask them this question: "If you had to put one of two signs in the window of your house, either "This house protected by firearms" or "This house is a gun-free zone", which would you put in your window?

  29. Great article!
    The idiot gunman must have felt even more secure shooting into a audience of Batman enthusiists who've crowded into a comic book character movie, at mid-night, that has been re-run over and over. Hollywierd can't seem to come up with anything new even in a world that is about to explode with violent dictators and mass murders aplenty. 'No story to be found here so let's just rerun a worn out old comic book character'! And they come in droves throwing money at Hollywierd. To this type of audience the sounds of gun fire and fifgting are ZAP and POW. Maybe that is why there were no armed citizens on the scene.

  30. GunFreeZones HaHaHa says:

    THAT Danno is what needs to happen….ALL over the US. Very neat what that 71 year old man did saving perhaps 10-20 lives. CCW holders defending themselves and other law abiding citizens. Police can't be everywhere, they simply draw the chalk line around the victims.

  31. CCW and taining says:

    Watch the training for CCW permits skyrocket. It is possible with training to bring a laser equipped CC into play in a second or two. Of course the perp used the smoke bomb to try to defeat this. But unless the bomb went off in your immediate vicinity, a second or two could still enable a barrage of shots. When you get a CCW most likely you are prepared to use it. It would be interesting to see how many CCW now keep themselves trained to react quickly. No doubt this terrible incident will have more at the range. How can the "do gooders" think that eliminating CCW or gun ownership in general will make these incidents less likely. The theater proved it is always possible to get firearms for illegal purposes. Anything can be purchased on the street.

  32. If a shooter thought that 20% of a group is armed, then that person would think twice about going there with guns and thoughts fo killing a lot of people — unless suicide is the ultimate intention. On the other hand, a person who is definitely crazy cannot be cataloged or put into a simple box but there are some who are smart enough to pretend lunacy to keep from being themselves from facing the hangman. The fact that the man in Colorado wore a bullet-proof vest to the theater is enough to convince me that the man is clearly thinking about not being killed while contemplating the deaths of others. Any judgment as to the man's mental health should keep this in mind.

    A "carrying" person must also have in mind that being armed is to be prepared for mayhem no matter where he/she goes. The regret of Dr. Schwartz in Killeen, TX where she saw her parents killed along with about 25 others was that she regretted leaving her gun in the car.

    Those who advocate no guns and taking guns away from others who have them are socially isolated from history and reality. To cater to them is another facet of lunacy, regardless of the fact that those people use such things as "freedom of speech" and other PC tricks to sneak in their naive philosophy.

  33. Maybe they couldn't have penetrated the body mrmor, but he would have been knocked around. Perhaps a face shot would have done it? I'll take my chances armed anyday!!!

  34. USA Born & Raised says:

    Gun control laws…all they do is disarm law abiding citizens. Period.
    Criminals and thugs have no regard to the law. They can get a gun from another street corner thug. They don't buy them from gun shops. They don't go through the background checks, etc. They don't go through gun safety courses. People who intentionally go through a conceal carry course do so for a purpose, to better understand their gun, to be prepared if they are placed into a life and/or death situation, to be able to defend themselves. They practice using their gun. They get comfortable using their gun. They understand their gun. They become a person who has better control of their gun. I would never want to shoot anyone. But if shooting a person to stop them from killing other innocent lives and to protect myself. In a heartbeat.

  35. As a liberal, I take offense to your statement that it's a "liberal agenda" to control firearms. I'd much rather have a "This house protected by firearms" sign than the alternative. I grew up with weapons in the house on a farm in the country – trained in their use and respectful of the damage they can cause. If that training could be pushed everywhere, end be much better off. But I'm still a liberal.

  36. wayno, NO! it would not have changed anything because he didn't wear the costume in the front door

  37. There is another option for people who do not carry concealed. Understand the problem you face.. If you face the muzzle when the shooting starts, lie down and pray! If you are beside or behind the shooter, MOVE IN! Crowd him from behind. When he stops to reload, reach over his shoulders, grab his head, and HANG ON! Put your fingers in his mouth or eyes, and DIG IN. This will distract the shooter, and <he should> drop the gun to protect his face. Don't let go! If a second responder moves in to help, front or side, the gun, or the shooters arm becomes a target. A gun is hard to hold: really! Then hang on, and pray for more help. Warning. This may not work, but you will die a hero, not a victim.

  38. he did use it and 12 people died!

  39. Two Texas Highway Patrol Officers were conducting speeding enforcement on Hwy 77, just south of Kingsville, Tx.

    One of the officers was using a hand held radar device to check speeding vehicles approaching the town of Kingsville .. The officers were suddenly surprised when the radar gun began reading 300 miles per hour and climbing.

    The officer attempted to reset the radar gun, but it would not reset and then it suddenly turned off.

    Just then a deafening roar over the Mesquite treetops on Hwy 77 revealed that the radar had in fact locked on to a USMC F/A-18 Hornet which was engaged in a low flying exercise near this, it's Naval Air home base location in Kingsville Tx.

    Back at the Texas Highway Patrol Headquarters in Corpus Christi the Patrol Captain fired off a complaint to the US Naval Base Commander in Kingsville for shutting down his equipment.

    The reply came back in true USMC style:

    'Thank you for your letter….

    You may be interested to know that the tactical computer in the Hornet had detected the presence of, and subsequently locked on to, your hostile radar equipment and automatically sent a jamming signal back to it, which is why it shut down.

    Furthermore, an Air-to-Ground missile aboard the fully armed aircraft had also automatically locked on to your equipment's location.

    Fortunately, the Marine Pilot flying the Hornet recognized the situation for what it was, quickly responded to the missile system alert status, and was able to override the automated defense system, before the missile was launched to destroy the hostile radar position, on the side of Hwy 77 So. Of Kingsville …

    The pilot suggests you cover your mouths when cussing at them, since the video systems on these jets are very high tech.

    Sergeant Johnson, the officer holding the radar gun, should get his dentist to check his left rear molar. It appears the filling is loose.. Also, the snap is broken on his holster.'

    Semper Fi

  40. Bill Samuel says:

    This is crazy. The perpetrator was dressed like a SWAT Team member with beaucoup protective gear. He was the only person in the theater who was protected from gun shots. If you had 20% of the theater gun nuts who started shooting, you would have greatly magnified the number of casualties. Far more innocent would have died and been injured.

    This is pretty obvious to anyone not warped by a gun-crazy ideology. This is one of the few countries in the world where it is legal for any citizen to buy assault rifles and large gun magazines. It also has more of these lone madmen gun massacres than any other nation. And it has one of the highest rates of casualties from gun violence – or any type of lethal violence – in the world outside contries with active civil wars or drug wars that are the equivalent of civil wars. You folks are a real danger to America.

    And don't bring up Switzerland to me. Yes, it has a high rate of gun ownership, but these are militia members and the nature of the weapons and the availability of ammunition is strictly controlled by the Swiss government. There is nothing libertarian in their system.

  41. BuffaloBob says:

    Prosecuted or not is not the issue. If one is armed that means he or she has the opportunity to end the slaughter. To have that ability and to not use it for fear of prosecution, is participating in the horrible murders. If you can stop something and do not, you are permitting others to die. Unforgivable.

  42. WELL HE WOULD BE DEAD LESS MOVIE GOERS WOULD BE DEAD, WOULD SAVE TAX MONEY AS WELL, NO HOUSEING OR COURT COST TO DEAL WITH, ARM EVERY SANE PERSON, WE NEED AND HAVE A RIGHT TO PROTECT OURSELF.

  43. Richard Solak says:

    Wow! The ban on wepons in the theater sure made an impact on the shooter didn't it? I wonder if there was a sign on the conviently unlocked back door where he entered. Maybe if it was locked he would have went to the front doors like every one else, saw the sign and went home. These exclusions only are heeded by the law abiding, not the wack jobs but they continue to make laws that will not do any good.

  44. Just knowing there will not be any resistance will bring out the coward. He had full body armor on but didn't fire a shot and was quietly arested in the parking lot. The difference? The cops had guns!

  45. This incident supports hand guns for trained citizens….liberals want only criminals and mentally unbalanced freaks to have weapons…the rest of us are defenseless and that's the way they want it!! This scene is proof we need to maintain our right to bear arms…..and lots of training needs to be promoted so we can eliminate the shooters!!!

  46. 2WarAbnVet says:

    In any event criminals will always regard "Gun Free Zones" as "Free Fire Zones". You will note that this perpetrator, no matter how heavily armed and protected, attacked a theater not a police station.

  47. We have been and ARE a nation of Sheep. Baaah, just go along. It won't happen to me, maybe. The police will protect me, if they EVER get here. The bullies ( Wolves ) have made it all the way to the White House. The Wolves want Control over EVERY aspect of your life, even your God Given Right to protect your family and yourself. Some people know this in their heart and soul and have become Sheep Dogs. The Sheep Dog will fight to the death to protect their family AND even the nearby Sheep. END Political Correctness. END Ever-expanding Big Government. END the political careers of those that are Wolves ( Bullies ). Take charge of your life and Take America Back. Anyone BUT the " Ineligible One " in November !

  48. U mean like it would have been for police officers and F B I Agents running in off the streets? Don't think any of them walk around with gas masks! I'll trust myself more to be the one protecting me!

  49. It's long past time to throw Obama,Hillery,Holder,Bloomberg and any other gun grabbers out of office and to tell the U N we are with drawing and they get no more of our money! The U N hates us any way and never backs us,only wants our money and control over us. No one should ever be allowed to tell Americans what we can or can not do, unless we are in a position to vote them out and say NO WAY!

  50. You sound like a combination of Obama,Holder,Hillery, Bloomberg,the brady Buch and the worth less U N combined! If you would prefer to see less Honest,Sane people owning guns move to china and you will get your wish! They will love U over there! Take the above fools with you too!

  51. Karol Gardner says:

    I think the government has a play in this and the Zimmerman case, soon it will pass and who would go visit to see if either are incarserated or not and a ban will come in to play, like when Clinton was in office, how many people would be taken into custody like this guy, he would of been taken down hard, gear or no gear, sorry for the losses of life, but there is long cartel out there and we must be able to protect ourselves from them as well as any

  52. The fact is he only had tactical gear, not bullet proof gear. Being trained also means knowing when it's safe to shoot and to know what you are shooting at. Which countries are you comparing us to that have 240 million people? While no one knows for sure what would have happened, I'd be willing to bet the shooter would be dead. People like you have been saying the country would turn into the wild west with more people getting guns. It hasn't happened yet and there are more gun owners than ever before. The reality of the deaths by gun are they are generally in the same areas of cities and done by people without regard for any laws.

  53. Rabelrouser says:

    So it would appear that their anti CCW policy contributed this mass murder and the wounding of too many others, therefore they could be considered culpable in the homicides as that their corprate policy ignored state law. But how many of the victims families will see this fact. Nor will this become an issue due to the horrendious nature of this crime.
    But the people should make this very subject of the right of self defense a public issue, that is how one person in Killeen Texas was able to get the first state CCW laws passed for personal self defense. She saw her parents gunned down in similar fashion and was unable to carry her firearm to have self defense.
    Those who believe in the right of lawful self defense should also publically boycott this theatre chain for their policy, and create a loss of revenue. Given the fact that there are over 100million firearms owners in this nation, this would have a serious impact and make lawful self defense an issue that the anti gun agenda could not overcome.
    I would also contact other theatres and inquire about their policy of lawful self defense, and if theirs is similar, refuse to do business with them.

  54. U are sure right, and anyone who depends on Obama,Hillery,Holder,Bloomberg,Police officers and or the U N to defend and or protect them are fools! I've carried legal as soon as it was allowed and carried for protection long before it was legal and would rather take the chance of jail than the undertaker! I know [ even if the above people don't] that criminals will always have and carry guns for crime and think it's O K for me to carry to prevent crime to me! Cops only protect themselves,their family and friends and Rich people and it's up to the rest of us to protect ourselves and our family and friends!

  55. An Honest person packing may have been out of the gas range and had a good shot! If I were armed and had a chance to drop him i would have and then rushed out with the other people,except knowing there was no chance for me to be shot in the back either. I would rather take my chances with a good jury than an undertaker!

  56. Simple answer they were afraid of to many people like Obama,Hillery,Holder,Bloomberg and the Brady Bunch and assorted stupid people!!!

  57. I am certainly NOT in favor of taking away the right to own / carry guns. It is our constitutional right. I do not see the reasoning, however, behind the ordinary citizen feeling a need to own an assault rifle. In the north where I live, men say they need these semi-automatic assault rifles with high power scopes and special armor piercing ammunition for deer hunting. It makes me wonder how the Native Americans ate when all they had were handmade longbows and arrows.

    Also, a person would have to be a very good shot to have killed the shooter. He was in full armor, which means a small possibility of a neck shot or maybe a shot through his gas mask – if it wasn't armored in some way. It would have been good to have a commando or two in attendance – those who could sneak up on the shooter and kill without use of any weapon other than their own hands. Armor doesn't protect against that.

    This is my one and only comment on this horrific attack. I will not even mention his name. I refuse to add to the publicity surrounding this incident – which is one of the main reasons these bullies commit such atrocities. They want their 15 minutes of fame. They won't get it from this old granny. I'd rather talk about someone's good deeds than publicize evil. Thank you.

  58. Rabelrouser says:

    So Bill, I guess I can assertain from you comment that you are against the lawful right of self defense?
    And in your estimation, how did being unarmed by the theatres policy protect those innocent victims?
    Was the policy of not allowing lawfull right to self defense a deterrent to the shooter?
    I really don't expect an answer, because your comment gave many clues to your intellectual dishonesty concerning the right of lawful self defense and just allowing the derainged individual the opportunity to accomplish this type of henious crime.
    I wont confuse you with factual statistics that prove that crime is deterred by lawfull self defense laws, your mind is already made up as by insolent propaganda from those who want you sir to become a victim too.
    Too bad they made your mind up for you.

  59. As to the old guy in Florida I say thank you, because no matter what you say, no good people were hurt or robbed and the robbers and all who think like they do now have to worry how many people in the place they plan to rob have guns and how many will use them! I carry and will shoot to defend myself and others too and I shot guns [ on family property under supervision since I was was twelve years old and that includes hand guns,Rifles and shot guns and I shoot at a range at least once a week and on family or friends property sometimes once or twice a week! Oh and I hit what I shoot at! One thing any criminal should know if you can see me you sure better know I'm carrying and u best hope you not just pass me by, but don't let me see U trying to harm anyone else either,no matter what Obama,Holder,Hillery,Bloomberg,the Brady Bunch or the U N thinks!

  60. Every time some one is hurt or killed in a gun free zone business they need to to file a lawsuite and get every dime they can and if I'm on the jury they will have my vote to get all the money they can!

  61. Great Answer to some jerks!

  62. Bill you are as stupid as Obama and dumb as a stump! If you believe any of the CRAP You are spewing around and forget Switzerland and move to China and you will find plenty of Idiots who think just like you and never have to worry about anything happening to you as just happened at the bat man movie. You and all Idiots who think like you would be real safe because the only people with guns are the police and the Army,so that should make Idiots like U feel safe! Oh can U take Obama,Hillery,Holder,Bloomberg,the Brady Bunch and the U N with you!

  63. Max Penn says:

    Because of the gun, your live in a free country. America was the only country to break away from the English Empire. That was because of the gun. There are many that do not see the facts for what they are. It's obvious you have little experience in fire arms. That a course.

  64. I guess I wasn't the only one wondering that. Would also like to know how to get rid of those annoying "You may also like" pop-up banners?? It is hard to read around them.

  65. larrylunts says:

    Let's see: A shooter with assault weapons & high capacity magazine, full body army, and the element of surprise. A crowded theater with blinding glare and cacophonous noise coming from the screen, many people in costumes, most assuming at first that this was some sort of live publicity stunt. People screaming, panicking, in motion, blinding tear gas everywhere, gunshots echoing, vision reduced to a few feet. Complete chaos.

    Let's assume that armed patron A has a sightline to the armored, moving, killer. He pulls his weapon, and fires through the noise and gas and the crowd. Meanwhile, armed patron B, who has also drawn his weapon, cannot see the killer, but he does see armed patron A firing his piece. Assuming, logically, that armed patron A is the shooter, armed patron B blows him away. Armed patron C, making the same assumption about armed patron B, blows HIM away. And so on.

    You'd most likely have a massacre, rather than just a bloodbath, with the majority of the 20% armed patrons taking each other out, within seconds, via friendly fire. Meanwhile, the odds of patron A having taken out the armored, moving killer, with a single small-arms shot in that noise and confusion, is somewhere between fantasy and delusion.

    I have another suggestion. How about functioning alarms and self-locking mechanisms on external exit doors, so it's not so easy for someone to evade the no-guns policy by slipping out to his car, and then coming back in, geared up like G.I. Joe on steroids?

  66. In Texas, that dirt bag would have managed to get off maybe 5 or 6 shots, before he hit the floor with a pound or two of lead in various parts of his body.

    Of course, that wouldn't have happened in Texas, for just that reason.

    There's a reason why things like that happen in Colorado. The people of Colorado live in unarmed fear. The people of Texas live without fear, because so many of us pack… Well, let me re-phrase that.

    The HONEST people of Texas live without fear and the CRIMINAL element live in constant fear, because so many HONEST people pack.

  67. Texas Chris says:

    He had two OC grenades and a home-made smoke device.

    That being said, two shooters firing a total of 18-36 rounds IN HIS DIRECTION would have been enough.

  68. Texas Chris says:

    Forcing the theater to allow CCW is a violation of private property rights.

  69. Texas Chris says:

    Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

  70. Live free or die says:

    The movie theater would not allow people to be armed. Well, that didn't stop the shooter, now did it?
    There is proof the movie theater did not provide adequate protect to it's customers.
    The Aurora police dept was already at the scene before the shootings, making sure people were disarmed prior to entering the movie. They totally proved to be useless in protecting anyone.

    Obviously the theater owner(s) are against our US Constitutional 2nd Amendment. Because of this violation, it would be reasonable to force the movie theater to be accountable and pay for all the medical expenses and pay the families for their loss and sufferings.

  71. Texas Chris says:

    In 20 years of firearms training I've never been trained to shoot while under the effects of tear gas. Nigh shoots, prone, running, on my back, single shooter, mulitple shooter, dark room, injured, one-hand reloads… All of it.

    But shooting in a dark theater, filled with smoke and OC, with the projector lighting up the haze, with 70+ terrified people screaming and running around…? That's a nightmare scenario that I will be trying to replicate in my training very soon. Believe me, I cannot think of a harder environment for self defense.

  72. Texas Chris says:

    Switzerland must be one of the most violent places on earth according to him, eh RD? And Chicago one of the safest…

    Or not.

  73. Texas Chris says:

    The police are trained to fill out the paperwork and haul off the body.

    They're not our personal security detail.

  74. Sgt.Rock says:

    The killer had the advantage of surprise, and he didn't even have to be a marksman. Firing randomly into a crowd would be just as effective as picking targets off individually. Some armed theatre-goer, on the other hand, would have to be as accurate as Annie Oakley, in order to hit a body-armored moving target in a vulnerable spot, while choking on tear gas in that noise and confusion. Meanwhile, other armed theatre-goers might be likely to assume anybody they saw holding, or firing a gun, was the shooter, and start firing on each other. Sorry, but this 20% scenario is a prescription for a cluster-f*** of monumental proportions.

  75. Texas Chris says:

    Exactly. The "no guns allowed" sign wouldn't have stopped this guy.

    Now a sign that read "A Minimum of 20% of this Audience is ARMED and TRAINED for self defense"… That's a sign worth reading! Theaters should give a discount to CCL carriers. It would save on their security costs!

  76. Texas Chris says:

    The shooter threw in 2 tear gas grenades, then a home-made smoke device.

    In my opinion the gas, deployed the way it was, prevented most reponses by any CCW. I, personally, would have been taking potshots at him, and could not possibly account for my missed shots. We are trained to always always ALWAYS know what's behind our target. In a smoky theater, especially with tear gas like OC, that is impossible.

  77. Texas Chris says:

    Lazers point both ways. Especially in a smokey room.

  78. Texas Chris says:

    Just the sound of returned fire is usually enough. Add to that the impact of a small caliber… Yeah, it's hard to imagine anyone sticking around for more.

    Then again, the guy is clearly crazy.

  79. Texas Chris says:

    I read it was "ballistic" armor. If not, he would have been an easy takedown.

  80. There needs to be an alert system in place to let theater owners/employees know when someone uses an emergency exit – and an alarm to let them know the door did not latch and lock as it should when someone leaves by that door. Emergency exit doors are made to open from the inside only – to allow patrons to leave in an emergency. They are also made to lock from the outside to keep people from sneaking into movies without paying. The guy must have propped the door open or taped the lock in order to get back in. An alarm would have told theater owners that "something is wrong with that door – go check it out."

    I also like Granny's idea of the commandos breaking the guy's neck.

  81. Texas Chris says:

    "more of these lone madmen gun massacres than any other nation"
    That is statistically incorrect. We neither have the highest number (Germany) nor the most per-capita (Uganda).

    Switzerland… they're NOT militia, they're everyday citizens. They're NOT restricted weapons, they're full-auto military-grade assault rifles.

    Bill, you are a ignorant as you are wrong.

  82. Bill Samuel says:

    The reports indicate it was ballistic armor. This means he had specifically prepared for the possibility of someone shooting at him. Since he did not attempt to escape or resist the police, it appears that he was thinking about someone inside shooting him, not police trying to arrest him. He appears to have ended the incident, and then waited quietly for the police to arrest him. This kind of individual is generally looking for publicity, so he may have had no reason to try to prevent his arrest.

    I can not understand how one could think that many people shooting in a crowded, dark movie theater would have been anything but a greater disaster.

  83. I agree with you!

  84. Great reasoning–agreed!!

  85. Matt Dillon says:

    Back in the 1990s, in the wake of the L.A. Riots, basketball superstore Magic Johnson opened a chain of Magic Johnson Theatres, mostly in blighted areas of major cities. These theatres were clean, modern, well-lighted, and had state-of-theart projection equipment. And heavy security. Metal detectors at the entrances kept anyone from bringing in a weapon, and security guards at the exits kept unwanted persons from entering or exiting.

    These were in neighborhoods where there was little business, but lots of commerce, in terms of prostitution and drug sales, and pretty much everyone carried a weapon, kids included. Law-abiding people, for the most part, didn't go out much after dark. Too dangerous. Usually, there were no chain grocery stores in these areas, just run-down liquor stores and bodegas, where you'd pay 2-3 times as much for a gallon of milk than you'd pay at a grocery store. But with grocery stores a long, long bus ride away, that wasn't a real option for the poor people who lived here.

    The Magic Johnson Theatres (which have since been merged into the AMC chain) were a godsend for these communities. In many cases, these were the first new commercial structures to be built in these areas for many years. They brought needed jobs, and they were oases of peace and tranquility in otherwise dangerous neighborhoods. Families felt safe bringing their children here to enjoy a night at the movies. I seriously doubt that allowing everyone to bring their weapons INTO the theatre would have achieved that same goal.

    When the Earp Brothers banned the open carry of handguns in 19th Century Tombstone, Arizona, it was a step in the right direction. I'd hate to see us go backwards as a people

  86. Jim Wright says:

    Everyone has an opinion; however yours has already been proven wrong. When the CCW laws were passed and the doctrine was changed to support defending yourself and your family the liberals started to howl that there would be blood in the streets, but it hasn't happened. I carry a gun and I know how to use it because the police cannot be everywhere no matter how good their intentions. The only one responsible for protecting you and your family is you.

  87. Sgt.Rock says:

    Really? You'd be packing armor-piercing rounds? Aren't those illegal for civilians?

    And this killer has the element of surprise, and the advantage of knowing that he doesn't even have to aim, because even random fire will take SOMEONE out in a packed theatre. He also has the advantage of being the only person in that theatre of knowing EXACTLY what is going on.

    Theatre patrons, on the other hands, thinking that this may be some sort of a publicity stunt, up until the moment they are blinded by tear gas or a bullet rips into their body, must be as accurate as Annie Oakley, if there are to hit a heavily-armored, moving target in a vulnerable spot without hitting an innocent patron instead, in that mass of moving, panicked, confused people. And the instant someone else fired his piece, he would be likely to draw fire from other shooters thinking HE was the gunman. And with seconds, you'd have everyone who was armed shooting at anyone else who was armed.

    I'm sorry, but this "Wild West" scenario, in this specific case, would be a prescription for disaster!

  88. exbuckeye says:

    While I agree in the concept, it os obvious you have never been
    prosecuted (or persecuted) and impoverished defending yourself
    in a court of law.

    Have you been watching the Zimmerman case?

  89. if democraps would spend less time killing babies and more time killing murderers we wouldn't have so much of this

  90. i have read(1) someone opened the door for him and(2) he bought a ticket went inside opened the door went out got dressed and came back inside which ever happened if the door had an alarm on it as it is supposed to have the fire alarm would have sounded and the theater would have been evacuated

  91. if the public had been allowed yo carry guns in the theater even if no one did he would not have dared do this

  92. just the fact that guns were allowed would have deterred him and no shots would have been fired thats why the US has not been attacked in spite of what the idiot democraps believe

  93. see my reply above

  94. toosmarttovoteGOP says:

    Okay. Let's say there wee twenty more gun nuts in the theater. The assailant and lit off a couple of tear gas canisters or smoke bombs. He fires a shot into the ceiling. Pandemonium ensues. HE'S FULLY ENCASED IN BODY ARMOR. Only armor-piercing rounds stand any chance of doing more than bruising him. And this author predicts FEWER casualties? What an idiot. A .44 Magnum MIGHT have gotten through. After that come assault weaponry with the aforementioned armor-piercing rounds. Time to get real.

  95. He did use it you idiot, the KILLER HOLMES is the one that had the guns!

  96. […] An armed population is one of the greatest threats to centralized, humanist government. It is more a symbol than anything. It lets the government tyrants know that its citizens will not suffer under tyranny. The citizens can still vote, and they can still strip the bureaucrats’ power away. […]

  97. As a retired law enforcement officer I can tell you this is about as irresponsible an article as I've read. I want to know how many shoot outs Mr. North has been involved in? Why is that important, because for those that have never been put in that predicament they have NO IDEA what it is like or the physical and psychological effects you go through. I don't care how good a shot you are shooting at paper targets, THEY DON'T SHOOT BACK! Police are highly trained with their firearms and yet in actual shooting incidents their shots miss on average over 95% of the time! Why?…because of the way your mind and body react to the situation. A reaction that CANNOT be duplicated on a firearms range. And in this case the shooter was dressed from head to toe in ballistic armour which would certainly stop handgun rounds. Mr. North if you are going to write articles like these I strongly suggest you do some serious homework first because when the defecation hits the oscillating device and all kinds of things start running through your mind, your adrenalin is rushing through your body, you get pinpoint vision and you start to shake all over, its a whole new ball game. Real life ain't like Hollywood movies!

  98. What TexasChris siad – by your reasoning if you entered any private residence or business, and fell victim to a crime because the owner forbade you to bring arms onto his or her private place then you suppose you could sue because you disarmed?

  99. Many countries have peacefully seceded from the British Empire just as slavery was ended peacefully throughout the Empire in 1830. The average American was worse off after the Revolution and paid 3x more tax. President Washington sent the army to crush a tax rebellion from the get-go.

  100. Exactly, most here have a Wild West view of guns where the good guys can quickly and efficiently shoot dead the bad guys. Any one with a gun there would have been disoriented as probably would have more likely to have shot innnocent people than the perpetrator. Even under Libertarian law anyone who harms an innocent person in self-defence will face criminal charges.

  101. Should a private owner be allowed to debar visitors from carrying their private arms or not?

  102. So the right to carry a gun overrides the right own and control your private property now?

  103. You can bet your Dumb A*S it does, if you open it to the public and strip the public of their ability to defend themselves and with out posting guards or police for their protection. Stupid as you sound you should move to Bloomberg land,they like stupid people like you!

  104. Gil, Another thought maybe you would like China even better no one except police and the Army have guns, but do the world a favor and take Obama,Hillery,Holder,Pelosie,Reid and Bloomberg and everyone else who thinks like you Idiots!

  105. Tird Of Fools says:

    Huey6367, are you one on donald duck's friends, huey. You and Gary North, are both morons. The shooter had full body armor. The only ones dying if 20 had guns and were trained were the unarmed patrons who would have been shot by friendly (the morons with guns) fire. Gary North was not there. If he was, he would have been the first on to run for his life, while the brave few who saved their loved ones and others died.

  106. rrjron is a fool says:

    rrjron. You are truly a moron, for that statement. Hey idiot!!, this is not about politics. So go back and sit down with the likes of Rush Limbaugh, a true draft dodger, and shut up or you'll make yourself look like a true moron.

  107. Like you said, from far away, that's what a friend said to you. Just goes to show you, only those that do not experience a tragedy like this, are knowledgable (not!) about things they know nothing about. Brave guy and fiend, join the Armed Service if both of you and the other brave armchair quarterbacks, have the guts! I bet you have an opinion about joining the Armed Services.

  108. Hey Pansey,the only way anyone knows for sure you are a moron is to see if your mouth is moving! Idiots like you make Rush look like the smartest person on earth, now hurry along to the white house for your sleep over with Obama! I guess we didn't have to worry about you being a draft dodger years ago did we, all you had to do was take your boyfriend with you to induction and show your Pink Panties,Right?

  109. "This was not like a school shooting. Most people would see it as a planned stunt. When the tear gas hit, you would be surprised and disoriented. It would be over before you could respond "

    Tear gas takes time to disperse though the air, even in a confined space. The stampede of crowds would be a strong clue that a mass shooting was in progress.

    A person trained to respond from a prone position might have been able to deliver a few shots. Even Body Armor does not protect the shootee from the impact of the bullet.

    Any resistance would be better than the Slaughterhouse Atmosphere of that theater and the Elitist attitude of the City Fathers in Aurora CO, who seem to think that people are livestock who need their horns clipped.

  110. "This is crazy. The perpetrator was dressed like a SWAT Team member with beaucoup protective gear. He was the only person in the theater who was protected from gun shots. If you had 20% of the theater gun nuts who started shooting, you would have greatly magnified the number of casualties. Far more innocent would have died and been injured."

    I disagree. Unless the man was wearing a trauma plate his "body armor" would not have protected him from bullet impact. Those impacts cause heavy bruising and are quite painful. Go to youtube for more details on what really happens when someone is shot while wearing "bullet resistant armor".

    I agree that most of the return shooters might have been at a disadvantage. It is difficult to shoot in a dark. You are assuming that there were no combat vets or persons who train night shooting.

    The history of CCW carries does not support your "wild west" Narrative. Most CCW holders do not 'spray and pray'. They tend to be quite reserved on returning fire. I think more likely CCW holders would found dead with their firearms still in the holsters than in some mass exchange of fire.

    "And it has one of the highest rates of casualties from gun violence – or any type of lethal violence – in the world outside contries with active civil wars or drug wars that are the equivalent of civil wars. You folks are a real danger to America. "

    The US is in the midst of a "drug war", Bill. Many of our "shooting deaths" are caused by territory disputes or debt collection associated with the "War on Drugs". Why give the Drug Dealers something else to sell, for example, real military assault rifles because folks like you have banned legal look alikes?

    "And don't bring up Switzerland to me. Yes, it has a high rate of gun ownership, but these are militia members and the nature of the weapons and the availability of ammunition is strictly controlled by the Swiss government."

    One of the largest mass shootings in history was by Israeli Reservist Dr. Baruch Goldstein, who murdered 29 worshipers and wounded 129 more with a Government issued selective fire assault rifle and government issued grenades at the Cave of Patriarchs mosque in 1994.. The Swiss and Israeli experience teaches us that it is the shooter and not 'assault weapons' that matters because mass shootings are not normally associated with such firearms in any nation. Obviously your claim that being a "trained member of the Militia" somehow matters is also false because Dr. Goldstein was a member of the IDF reserves at the time of this murder.

    Dr. Goldstein died at the sight of his murders, beaten to death by survivors. Apparently Palestinian Arabs have more character than American movie goers?

  111. The Traveller says:

    You are completely right, even tho the opinion of others would say different. When the sign says "No Weapons Allowed", it means "No Weapons Allowed". In this case, the needs of the one (the movie theater) outweigh the needs of the many (the people who frequent said movie theater). Unfortunately, the town where the theater is located is a liberal, anti-gun town. It would not have mattered if all of the people who were watching the movie were "packing", THEY would have been prosecuted for manslaughter AND carrying a weapon in a prohibited place, if they responded to the shooter with fervor. Unfortunately, the needs of the liberal, anti-gun people outweighed the needs of the ones who were shot and killed by this man. Wake up people. The liberals have proven beyone a shadow of a doubt that they are ALL anti-gun, and even though it took one man to kill and maim many, they are not going to budge on their stance of anti "protection of one's self".