You're armed in the Colorado theater, what do you do?

This guy wanted to live through the attack - and to take out anyone who was armed in the theater. Helmet, bullet proof vest, neck, groin and leg protectors.

Only thing that would instantly take him out would be a face shot, which would be tough with him moving and with smoke all around.

It would be a tough task.

I think an armed movie goer would have instinctively gone for chest shots and then been taken down by Holmes. Would have been tough to tell Holmes was so well protected with the smoke grenades he set off.

IF you could assess how much body armor he had on, I would have laid on the ground between seats and let him pass (or somehow circle around), and sneak up behind for a face shot, or perhaps empty a magazine in the rear of his legs which I assume were not protected.
 
Even with body armor, a 40 cal round to the chest would take the spit and vinegar out of you...bring you to your knees.
 
I'd try to shoot at the guy, but it would have been tough with the tear gas and the body armor on him.

yes...it could be that just someone returning fire and missing COULD have made this guy run out, but as we all know, you're not supposed to have guns in a theater...so we'll never know for sure...

so we now have another senseless mass killing because no one had a gun to return fire.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure this was a big theater and most likely the distance between the gunman and you would probably had been more than 20 ft away. If so, I would have had a hard time taking a head shot because the chance of missing and hitting someone else is too great. I mean if he's back towards the screen, that might be different. Otherwise, I would get to cover until he gets closer or just finish off a magazine aiming at his chest. Don't forget that there are people running and might be getting in the way of your line of fire.

Also, what do you guys think the chances are to rush the gunman w/o being armed?
 
Look for the muzzle flash through the smoke and darkness. Stay low moving underneath seat rows. See how many assailants are there. Formulate a course of action.
 
Also, what do you guys think the chances are to rush the gunman w/o being armed?

In a darkened movie house, with the assailant's sight inhibited by a mask, then possible depending on positioning and his focus of attention. Depending on the situation I would attempt.
 
I almost think that MORE people might have died if someone tried shooting back in that particular situation. Dude had armor and set off tear gas. It would be hard enough to fire accurately in a darkened theater, especially with the movie going on. I can't imagine how difficult it would be while coughing and having watery eyes, people screaming and running in every direction, etc.

EDIT - then again, maybe he would have concentrated his fire on you instead of shooting random people, allowing more people time to escape.
 
Last edited:
  • Muzzle flash in a dark theater makes for bad low light vision.
  • The lack of a backstop and presence of many panic stricken patrons makes it difficult to take a safe shot. The bad guy can arbitrarily fire because anyone is a potential target. While the good guy has only one target.
  • The target is using a long gun which is far superior in every respect outside of the ability to conceal, when compared to a handgun. So any good guy is likely to be outgunned.
  • Bad guy is wearing body armor which limits effective shot placement (likely the head and arm pit areas)
  • Smoke is in the air, likely creating a screen or some sort of concealment, in addition to the darkness/fluctuating light conditions (muzzle flash, projector, etc)
  • Other psychological and physical factors play as well (lack of depth perception, tunnel vision, time perception)


I'm not saying that a good guy could not have taken this Holmes guy out, but its going to be an extremely difficult to take out this guy with a pocket sized 380, or any other commonly carried firearm. Someone who is carrying would have roughly a 10" target to get a head shot, or a couple of 6" targets which will get narrower depending on the angle. Add to that the other conditions present...
An armed good guy may have had a chance, but I'm not convinced that the outcome would be much different. The bad guy gave himself every advantage possible - there's just not much anyone could have done. It is worth mentioning that the anti-weapon policy of the movie chain didnt amount to sh!t when it came to this tragedy. Perhaps larger signage?
 
I am not in the theater at all, finding it far preferable to watch movies at home where I watch them at all.
 
I am not in the theater at all, finding it far preferable to watch movies at home where I watch them at all.

I can't resist the local dollar theatre. I've been a special effects lover since 'Star Wars.' Something about the big screen makes the experience more enjoyable.
 
This guy wanted to live through the attack - and to take out anyone who was armed in the theater. Helmet, bullet proof vest, neck, groin and leg protectors.

Al that in a place he KNEW everyone was unarmed..

All that shit on a young man in good health,,slows you down and inhibits both movement and vision.

If you tripped him he wouldn't have been able to get up. at least not quickly.
 
:eek: P.O.S. Plain and simple.

Compare that with the guy who dove in front of his sister and her boyfriend to shield them from bullets and ended up giving his life and they lived because of it. That is true bravery and sacrifice.

Rev9
 
Compare that with the guy who dove in front of his sister and her boyfriend to shield them from bullets and ended up giving his life and they lived because of it. That is true bravery and sacrifice.

Rev9

Yes. And the three others that gave their lives shielding their loved ones. Bravery and sacrifice, indeed. I don't even understand how the one that abandoned woman and children can't keep from slitting his wrists. That kinda shame lead me to my own doom.
 
Are you suggesting that abandoning his 2 children and significant other in a room filled with tear gas and bullets was the prudent decision?

How the hell did you get that from what I posted?

I was contrasting what they did with the one POS that this thread had reported on, and I was curious as to why the bullets seemed to be directed at the women (if you have to dive to take a bullet for your girlfriend, then someone was shooting AT HER and not at the likely larger target, the boyfriend).

* * *

Also, those of you arguing you would have crawled under the seats must go to different theaters than I do. When no one's sitting in them, there's probably half a foot of clearance under the seat (being generous) and many seats sit on stairs due to the new stadium seating style. In other words, there is no "under" unless you are in the very front area. This also assumes you would not have to crawl under seats dripping with gore and holding dead/injured.
 
Last edited:
I like to think I would have taken him down. Hard to know, having never been shot at, though.
 
i havnt went to the movies in years.

back then.. tickets cost like 5-7 dollars. now its double? i always sneaked in food =p.
 
i havnt went to the movies in years.

back then.. tickets cost like 5-7 dollars. now its double? i always sneaked in food =p.

First showing of the day is $4 where I live. It goes up from there. I think matinee is $5.50, and regular price is something like $7.50.
 
Back
Top