> > I was thinking the exact same thing, in an instance like this anyone in his near
> > proximity could probably have ended the carnage in a second if they were concealed
> > owners and had their gun. I did not know about the ban until I read your comment.
>
> Bullshit. You seriously think you could get the guy in a crowded, darkened,
> smoke-filled cinema when he's wearing a bullet-proof vest? You'd need to place the
> guy, clear the line in front and behind him, and get a shot on a part of him that
> isn't armoured. You would've just increased the number of victims.
If there was a chance that even a small percentage of the people in that theater had guns, then this guy would have never tried this in the first place. Nobody would need to take him out in a "darkened, smoke-filled cinema" because he wouldn't be there.
It's like a school bully that picks on people who won't (or can't) fight back. As soon as there's a danger of the bully's victim fighting back, he moves onto other "easier" targets.
GroovyMAME support forum on BYOAC
|
Previous 
Index 
Next 
Flat 
Re: ....
Reply
....
