Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

Reports of actual crimes and investigations, not hypothetical situations.

Moderators: carlson1, Keith B

User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 27
Posts: 13562
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#406

Post by C-dub »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:As more witnesses are being interviewed by the media we learn more about what happened. Apparently, there was no military style sweep from the exit door through the theater in one motion. He apparently fired the shotgun until it was empty and then switched to the AR. There was a lull in the action at that time, but the duration is unknown. There was a lull of several seconds while he tried to clear the AR when it jammed. I've seen three people interviewed who stated the shooter would stop in the isle and talk to/threaten people, even pulling them out of their seats and grabbing them by the hair. Then he shot them. During these times, he was vulnerable. If he’s close enough to touch me, he’s close enough for me to shoot him squarely in his unprotected face. As the Navy Seal in the linked article mentioned, there are almost always opportunities. His helmet was a vision barrier and if he really was wearing a gas mask, that destroyed his peripheral vision. I say "if" because I've heard some interviews that cast doubt on whether or how long he wore a mask.

The crowd was panicked which means the shooter didn't have control of the scene. This can work to a defender's benefit because the shooter cannot keep an eye on everyone in every direction. (Apparently he didn't care about doing so, if he stopped to threaten people individually and put his hands on them.) From the descriptions available, it certainly doesn't appear that he had every person in the crowd in front of like a drover riding drag.

KHOU Ch. 11 TV in Houston interviewed a retired FBI agent now working as a security consultant in the private sector. When he first came on the air, I thought "here we go with the anti-gun, do-nothing speech" but boy was I wrong! He was reserved in his comments, but the message was clear. With no way to escape or barricade against a dedicated shooter, would-be victims must act, react, do something because no one is going to rescue you. He made it clear that the reaction needs to be an immediate and violent response to the threat. Again, these are not quotes, but that was the message.

Passengers' response to the 9/11 hijackers have been discussed, including the difference with the folks on flight 93. It wasn't courage that made the difference in the reactions of the passengers on flight 93, it was knowledge. They knew from cell phone conversations with loved ones that this was not an "ordinary" hijacking and they were not going to be rescued. Their future was in their own hands. They made the decision to save themselves or die trying and by their death, save countless others. Armed with the knowledge gained on 9/11, airline passengers know they must act to save themselves and they have successfully taken action against terrorists and threatening passengers (and even one pilot). The passengers on a Southwest Airlines flight killed a passenger who was trying to open a door while in flight.

Unlike the passengers on flight 93 who didn't gain critical knowledge until they were in the midst of a deadly threat, we have known for years that dedicated shooters (or "active shooters" if you want to use the current, less descriptive term) rely upon 1) slow response by law enforcement (if any); and 2) a timid, sheep-like response from their victims. Law enforcement ranking officers and elected officials need to be honest with the public and tell them exactly what the retired FBI agent stated on his TV interview. React swiftly and violently as a group. Some will probably die, but the body count will be greatly reduced. Perhaps more importantly, people who want to massacre the innocent will come to realize that they would not standing before a herd of sheep, but cattle who will most certainly trample them to save themselves and others.

I want to acknowledge that my opinions are based upon my training and experience, as well as my age. I’m 62 years old with grown children who are quite capable of raising my grandchildren and I have plenty of life insurance to take care of my wife if I die. I also realize that some people run to the sound of gunfire while some run away. The former are not foolhardy and the latter are not cowards; it's just the way we are wired. But dedicated shooters in confined settings with the potential for mass casualties, while rare, present a unique situation where the flight response so natural for some is simply not a viable option.

Chas.
Exactly! Thanks Charles.

This illustrates my point and it comes from someone with more "street cred" than I. Forget that you have a gun. Let's say you don't have a gun. I'm not talking about one's ability to hit this guy with your EDC somewhere where the armor won't stop your round(s). The murderer was within 20 feet of several people and completely ignored them. He protected himself from being shot as best he could, but then ignored people close to him that could have just tackled him and taken his guns away from him. He was so focused on what was in front of him that he was probably completely unaware of what was to his sides or even behind him.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider
User avatar

SewTexas
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 3509
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 11:52 pm
Location: Alvin
Contact:

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#407

Post by SewTexas »

I understand Keith has posted the Colorado "Law" refuting my argument that Denver and Aurora are 'gun free' zones....I've done a bit more study, trying to figure out what's happened since we've moved, I know it couldn't have changed that much, (besides the fact that some of that site was saying that some of it had occurred while we were there and we would have been aware of it).

So, here's the deal (as I understand it) yes, Colorado has a CHL law, for the most part it's like the TX law. Denver and Aurora claim "Home Rule" however and have said :nono: "NOT HERE" "Not in our buildings" "Not on our streets"

a friend sent me this link, I have to question it...Colorado Springs wasn't this strict just a couple of years ago... :totap:
http://www.coloradoceasefire.org/munilaws.htm
~Tracy
Gun control is what you talk about when you don't want to talk about the truth ~ Colion Noir

philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 29
Posts: 18222
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#408

Post by philip964 »

Per those regulations, he broke the law when he fired the gun because he was not a police officer or at a shooting range.

In addition, he broke the law when he carried a loaded gun in his car to the movie theater. That is unless he loaded the guns when he went out the back door to get them.

He now doesn't know why he is in jail. He is suffering a memory loss. He also has complained about the food.
User avatar

03Lightningrocks
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 26
Posts: 11453
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Plano

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#409

Post by 03Lightningrocks »

philip964 wrote:Per those regulations, he broke the law when he fired the gun because he was not a police officer or at a shooting range.

In addition, he broke the law when he carried a loaded gun in his car to the movie theater. That is unless he loaded the guns when he went out the back door to get them.

He now doesn't know why he is in jail. He is suffering a memory loss. He also has complained about the food.

He is going to try the crazy card for sure. As for the food... I really feel bad for him. :roll: What I am hoping is that the jail inmates preparing his food are fixing it up "real special" for him. :thumbs2:

RPB
Banned
Posts in topic: 22
Posts: 8697
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#410

Post by RPB »

suffering a memory loss.
That's our tax dollars--- the grants he got to study memory ...
he's a memory expert.
I'm no lawyer

"Never show your hole card" "Always have something in reserve"

apostate
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2336
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 10:01 am

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#411

Post by apostate »

Who would know better how to fake symptoms?
User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 27
Posts: 13562
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#412

Post by C-dub »

SewTexas wrote: So, here's the deal (as I understand it) yes, Colorado has a CHL law, for the most part it's like the TX law. Denver and Aurora claim "Home Rule" however and have said :nono: "NOT HERE" "Not in our buildings" "Not on our streets"
I thought Denver's "Home Rule" restrictions pertained to open carry and that Denver, at least, did not further restrict concealed carry more than state law.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider

RPB
Banned
Posts in topic: 22
Posts: 8697
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#413

Post by RPB »

apostate wrote:Who would know better how to fake symptoms?
:iagree:
I'm no lawyer

"Never show your hole card" "Always have something in reserve"
User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 17
Posts: 26851
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#414

Post by The Annoyed Man »

SewTexas wrote:I understand Keith has posted the Colorado "Law" refuting my argument that Denver and Aurora are 'gun free' zones....I've done a bit more study, trying to figure out what's happened since we've moved, I know it couldn't have changed that much, (besides the fact that some of that site was saying that some of it had occurred while we were there and we would have been aware of it).

So, here's the deal (as I understand it) yes, Colorado has a CHL law, for the most part it's like the TX law. Denver and Aurora claim "Home Rule" however and have said :nono: "NOT HERE" "Not in our buildings" "Not on our streets"

a friend sent me this link, I have to question it...Colorado Springs wasn't this strict just a couple of years ago... :totap:
http://www.coloradoceasefire.org/munilaws.htm
http://opencarry.org/co.html
Summary
Colorado was once one of our "Gold Star" open carry states. However, Denver filed and won a suit challenging the states excellent preemption law. Consequently, both open carry and unlicensed open car carry in Denver are prohibited. There are reports that other localities are planning to follow suit. Currently, outside of Denver, car carry is unrestricted and localities are almost completely preempted in enforcing firearms restrictions, and must post specific facilities which are off limits to open carry.
So, does Colorado still have a preemption law, or is it only "invalid" in Denver? And on what basis did Denver win this lawsuit?
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"

#TINVOWOOT
User avatar

Kythas
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 11
Posts: 1685
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 10:06 am
Location: McKinney, TX

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#415

Post by Kythas »

The Annoyed Man wrote:
SewTexas wrote:I understand Keith has posted the Colorado "Law" refuting my argument that Denver and Aurora are 'gun free' zones....I've done a bit more study, trying to figure out what's happened since we've moved, I know it couldn't have changed that much, (besides the fact that some of that site was saying that some of it had occurred while we were there and we would have been aware of it).

So, here's the deal (as I understand it) yes, Colorado has a CHL law, for the most part it's like the TX law. Denver and Aurora claim "Home Rule" however and have said :nono: "NOT HERE" "Not in our buildings" "Not on our streets"

a friend sent me this link, I have to question it...Colorado Springs wasn't this strict just a couple of years ago... :totap:
http://www.coloradoceasefire.org/munilaws.htm
http://opencarry.org/co.html
Summary
Colorado was once one of our "Gold Star" open carry states. However, Denver filed and won a suit challenging the states excellent preemption law. Consequently, both open carry and unlicensed open car carry in Denver are prohibited. There are reports that other localities are planning to follow suit. Currently, outside of Denver, car carry is unrestricted and localities are almost completely preempted in enforcing firearms restrictions, and must post specific facilities which are off limits to open carry.
So, does Colorado still have a preemption law, or is it only "invalid" in Denver? And on what basis did Denver win this lawsuit?
I'm not sure about this, either. I have a friend whose cousin is a veterinarian in Aurora, CO. His cousin told him that Aurora does have a city ordinance banning both open and concealed carry and the police do enforce it, therefore carry of any kind is effectively banned there. I guess nobody wants to be the test case to challenge it, especially since Denver challenged State preemption and won. I guess if one city can win that, other cities feel they would win, also, so ignore preemption.
“I’m all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let’s start with typewriters.” - Frank Lloyd Wright

"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of arms" - Aristotle
User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 17
Posts: 26851
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#416

Post by The Annoyed Man »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:As more witnesses are being interviewed by the media we learn more about what happened. Apparently, there was no military style sweep from the exit door through the theater in one motion. He apparently fired the shotgun until it was empty and then switched to the AR. There was a lull in the action at that time, but the duration is unknown. There was a lull of several seconds while he tried to clear the AR when it jammed. I've seen three people interviewed who stated the shooter would stop in the isle and talk to/threaten people, even pulling them out of their seats and grabbing them by the hair. Then he shot them. During these times, he was vulnerable. If he’s close enough to touch me, he’s close enough for me to shoot him squarely in his unprotected face. As the Navy Seal in the linked article mentioned, there are almost always opportunities. His helmet was a vision barrier and if he really was wearing a gas mask, that destroyed his peripheral vision. I say "if" because I've heard some interviews that cast doubt on whether or how long he wore a mask.

The crowd was panicked which means the shooter didn't have control of the scene. This can work to a defender's benefit because the shooter cannot keep an eye on everyone in every direction. (Apparently he didn't care about doing so, if he stopped to threaten people individually and put his hands on them.) From the descriptions available, it certainly doesn't appear that he had every person in the crowd in front of like a drover riding drag.

KHOU Ch. 11 TV in Houston interviewed a retired FBI agent now working as a security consultant in the private sector. When he first came on the air, I thought "here we go with the anti-gun, do-nothing speech" but boy was I wrong! He was reserved in his comments, but the message was clear. With no way to escape or barricade against a dedicated shooter, would-be victims must act, react, do something because no one is going to rescue you. He made it clear that the reaction needs to be an immediate and violent response to the threat. Again, these are not quotes, but that was the message.

Passengers' response to the 9/11 hijackers have been discussed, including the difference with the folks on flight 93. It wasn't courage that made the difference in the reactions of the passengers on flight 93, it was knowledge. They knew from cell phone conversations with loved ones that this was not an "ordinary" hijacking and they were not going to be rescued. Their future was in their own hands. They made the decision to save themselves or die trying and by their death, save countless others. Armed with the knowledge gained on 9/11, airline passengers know they must act to save themselves and they have successfully taken action against terrorists and threatening passengers (and even one pilot). The passengers on a Southwest Airlines flight killed a passenger who was trying to open a door while in flight.

Unlike the passengers on flight 93 who didn't gain critical knowledge until they were in the midst of a deadly threat, we have known for years that dedicated shooters (or "active shooters" if you want to use the current, less descriptive term) rely upon 1) slow response by law enforcement (if any); and 2) a timid, sheep-like response from their victims. Law enforcement ranking officers and elected officials need to be honest with the public and tell them exactly what the retired FBI agent stated on his TV interview. React swiftly and violently as a group. Some will probably die, but the body count will be greatly reduced. Perhaps more importantly, people who want to massacre the innocent will come to realize that they would not standing before a herd of sheep, but cattle who will most certainly trample them to save themselves and others.

I want to acknowledge that my opinions are based upon my training and experience, as well as my age. I’m 62 years old with grown children who are quite capable of raising my grandchildren and I have plenty of life insurance to take care of my wife if I die. I also realize that some people run to the sound of gunfire while some run away. The former are not foolhardy and the latter are not cowards; it's just the way we are wired. But dedicated shooters in confined settings with the potential for mass casualties, while rare, present a unique situation where the flight response so natural for some is simply not a viable option.

Chas.
Charles, excellent post, and that is exactly the point I made in my previous post. The Flight 93 heroes came to the realization that nobody was going to rescue them but themselves, and that if they wanted to live, they needed to act. I am convinced that they acted with the hope that they might be successful. Sadly, they were not, but they did save countless other lives by their self-sacrifice........and they would have died anyway, had they sat there and done nothing. I will always hold a place in my heart for their example. They were challenged greatly, and they proved worthy of the challenge. They deserve nothing less than reverence. The passengers on the other planes just never arrived at that conclusion....again, not because they were bad people, but simply because they were the products of our culture, which teaches us from cradle to grave dependence on the authorities to rescue us. The decision to carry a gun is so poorly received by the public—sometimes even by self-identified conservatives—precisely because it is a decision to no longer rely on authorities for one's personal safety. Those who don't understand it perceive it as a defiance of authority, particularly authority's ability to control us. Control is good, defiance is bad; therefore people who carry guns are bad—a singularly illogical position given the SCOTUS decision in Castle Rock v. Gonzales. Of course, leftists don't really have public safety at heart. They want overarching control and diminishment of individual freedoms, and they will tell any lie in order to have it. Control is good, defiance is ba-a-a-a-a-ah(d).

I posted about this back when I first joined this forum because, philosophically as a religious person, I had to give full intellectual examination to my motives for choosing to carry a concealed firearm. For me, the issue wasn't the implied possibility of taking another person's life—I've never had a problem with the idea of self-defense, and scripture clearly allows it in certain circumstances (so long as it is not murder)—it was the idea of whether or not the decision to carry a gun was also a decision to not trust in God's providence and protections; and learning to trust had been one of the big struggles in my personal spiritual walk. The way I resolved that, long before I ever found scriptural support for self-defense, was that I came to realize that God might, on some occasion, call for me to be the agent of my own deliverance (or even someone else's deliverance, which is why the idea of "sheepdog" appeals to me), and that if He did call on me, I had better be prepared for it. Others are certainly are free to arrive at other justifications for themselves. This was merely mine, and it may be no better or no worse than anyone else's. And of course, I've been carrying long enough now that it is second nature, and the Holy Spirit continues to confirm it to me as a proper decision.

In any case, the culture has undoubtedly come to distrust and discourage reliance on self or God, or anything else besides the state. The issues of self-defense and the RKBA are merely a part of this. Witness the assaults on capitalism from the left. Capitalism encourages personal freedom AND personal responsibility—the freedom to pursue a vision of starting and building a business (no matter what Obama says about it), or to invest money in somebody else's business idea; as well as accepting the consequences of risk, poor decision-making, or the failures of one's investments. Liberals want darwinism preached in the schools and churches, but apparently not in the boardrooms or stock-markets. And, they are blind to their own inconsistencies or to the microcosmic immorality of preventing the means of self-defense, and the macrocosmic immorality of preventing the means of seizing back self-government from the crushing social burdens imposed by egotists who believe that their right to govern is genetic and beyond question.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"

#TINVOWOOT
User avatar

SewTexas
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 3509
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 11:52 pm
Location: Alvin
Contact:

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#417

Post by SewTexas »

it looks like the "Home Rule" bit is still out for judgement, but no, I wouldn't want to be the test case....that said, I will admit that when we lived there we did carry loaded in the car....that rule is just nuts, we weren't going to unload depending on which city we were driving through, we just drove the limit and followed the driving rules....we just didn't carry into the stores if we were in Denver, Aurora, or Boulder....'course, we very seldom went to Boulder anyway, I mean, why????
~Tracy
Gun control is what you talk about when you don't want to talk about the truth ~ Colion Noir
User avatar

RoyGBiv
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 9551
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:41 am
Location: Fort Worth

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#418

Post by RoyGBiv »

The Annoyed Man wrote:So, does Colorado still have a preemption law, or is it only "invalid" in Denver? And on what basis did Denver win this lawsuit?
I travel to CO enough that I got my TX CHL specifically so that I would be able to carry in CO. I only had a FL non-resident permit prior to that and CO requires your CC permit to be a "resident" permit for reciprocity. That said, I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, just my opinion...

I have not been able to find anything in Colorado law that would allow any local law to override State laws on concealed carry. Colorado law DOES allow local law to ban OPEN carry.

Colorado CC Laws (note: if you try to search the Lexis/Nexis database you need to use IE. FF doesn't work)
http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/CD ... 1622199820" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/Colorado/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Specifically:
18-12-214. Authority granted by permit - carrying restrictions

(1) (a) A permit to carry a concealed handgun authorizes the permittee to carry a concealed handgun in all areas of the state, except as specifically limited in this section. A permit does not authorize the permittee to use a handgun in a manner that would violate a provision of state law. A local government does not have authority to adopt or enforce an ordinance or resolution that would conflict with any provision of this part 2.
[note: "Part 2" refers to the CO CC Permit law which is CO 18 Article 12 Part 2

and...
29-11.7-101. Legislative declaration
......
(2) Based on the findings specified in subsection (1) of this section, the general assembly concludes that:
(a) The regulation of firearms is a matter of statewide concern;
(b) It is necessary to provide statewide laws concerning the possession and ownership of a firearm to ensure that law-abiding persons are not unfairly placed in the position of unknowingly committing crimes involving firearms.
and ....
29-11.7-104. Regulation - carrying - posting

A local government may enact an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the open carrying of a firearm in a building or specific area within the local government's jurisdiction. If a local government enacts an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the open carrying of a firearm in a building or specific area, the local government shall post signs at the public entrances to the building or specific area informing persons that the open carrying of firearms is prohibited in the building or specific area.
And finally.....
18-4-201. Definitions

(3) A person "enters unlawfully" or "remains unlawfully" in or upon premises when the person is not licensed, invited, or otherwise privileged to do so. A person who, regardless of his or her intent, enters or remains in or upon premises that are at the time open to the public does so with license and privilege unless the person defies a lawful order not to enter or remain, personally communicated to him or her by the owner of the premises or some other authorized person. <snipped>
The one exception that I'm aware of is Denver's ban on the sale of certain types of weapons. This was upheld by the State Supreme Court in 2006.
http://www.sddt.com/News/article.cfm?So ... 200606051s" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If I was in that theater I would have been carrying. I still assume, based on my reading of Colorado law, that CC in that theater would have been perfectly legal for me to do, unless and until I am asked to leave by management.

Again.... I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice. :tiphat:
I am not a lawyer. This is NOT legal advice.!
Nothing tempers idealism quite like the cold bath of reality.... SQLGeek
User avatar

Jaguar
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1332
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:24 pm
Location: Just west of Cool, Texas

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#419

Post by Jaguar »

smoothoperator wrote:
Jaguar wrote:Maybe there was not an appropriate moment or situation for those that wanted to - to do so. I will not disparage anyone in that horrible event, but allow me to point out some heroes.
I wonder if the married guy who died protecting his girlfriend had good life insurance for his wife and their two kids.
People earn the Medal of Honor for such courage and self-sacrifice in the military. There is no equivalent in ordinary life -- or what should be ordinary life. Maybe his marriage was in trouble, maybe it was his fault, maybe hers, probably a combination of the two. Regardless of his marital issues, he died protecting a loved one and that qualifies as hero in my book.
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -- James Madison

philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 29
Posts: 18222
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

#420

Post by philip964 »

In case you had any doubts, the shooter was seeing a psychiatrist who specializes in Schizophrenia.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/colorado-shoot ... BNdI_WBpyc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I assume she will be sued.

So do you become a psychiatrist, and risk that every patient you see, will go and do something "crazy" and you will be blamed?
Post Reply

Return to “The Crime Blotter”