If I had brought my handgun into that theater in Colorado...

This is a discussion on If I had brought my handgun into that theater in Colorado... within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; After 30 years active duty in the USMC and six years of that in combat in RVN (4 tours) I probably see this a whole ...

Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 169
Like Tree296Likes

Thread: If I had brought my handgun into that theater in Colorado...

  1. #76
    Senior Member Array wjh2657's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lafayette, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,166
    After 30 years active duty in the USMC and six years of that in combat in RVN (4 tours) I probably see this a whole lot different than most of you. First of all, any handgun , even the Super Death Ray kill elephants with a single shot, 1911 .45 ACP (the weapon I carried in Nam btw), is not an effective counter measure to an assault rifle. Second, the room was dark and people were running in panic all over the place (witnesses statements), probably between you and your target. Third, civilian courts do not accept "collateral damage", hit anybody but the BG and you are in exactly the same court as him, "Mad Dog Killer". Fourth, if you opened fire and he returned fire in a crowded public place, you are probably going to be perceived as a party to a gunfight and not a self defense situation, therefore equally responsible for any casualties, from your bullets or his. This was a no-win situation.

    What would I have done? Seek cover for me and mine and be prepared to fire back if he got close and fired directly at us. Getting into a firefight between an assault rifle and a handgun is not showing good sense. (this based on having been in firefights for real, luckily I had a Marine rifle company with their own assault rifles to back me up and collateral damage was acceptable).
    Retired Marine, Retired School Teacher, Independent voter, Goldwater Conservative.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #77
    VIP Member Array Brad426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,748
    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    After 30 years active duty in the USMC and six years of that in combat in RVN (4 tours) I probably see this a whole lot different than most of you. First of all, any handgun , even the Super Death Ray kill elephants with a single shot, 1911 .45 ACP (the weapon I carried in Nam btw), is not an effective counter measure to an assault rifle. Second, the room was dark and people were running in panic all over the place (witnesses statements), probably between you and your target. Third, civilian courts do not accept "collateral damage", hit anybody but the BG and you are in exactly the same court as him, "Mad Dog Killer". Fourth, if you opened fire and he returned fire in a crowded public place, you are probably going to be perceived as a party to a gunfight and not a self defense situation, therefore equally responsible for any casualties, from your bullets or his. This was a no-win situation.

    What would I have done? Seek cover for me and mine and be prepared to fire back if he got close and fired directly at us. Getting into a firefight between an assault rifle and a handgun is not showing good sense. (this based on having been in firefights for real, luckily I had a Marine rifle company with their own assault rifles to back me up and collateral damage was acceptable).
    First, thanks for your service. Secondly, you hit the nail on the head with the collateral damage thing... unlike the bad guys, you can't shoot the innocents running around. It's frowned upon.
    I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
    Clint Eastwood

  4. #78
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,950
    Quote Originally Posted by forcifer View Post
    Thanks for all your input and replies.

    First, I would like to say, I really like all the "fight" attitudes we have in here. I'm all for fighting. Otherwise I wouldn't be on this forum. That being said, I would like to move this thread into thinking on a more strategic level. Because let's be honest: being all gung-ho and rambo and rushing at the shooter right away will probably just land you (and those around you) in the coffin faster than anyone else in that theater.
    Not necessarily. If you just rush at him blindly maybe but if you time your attack for a reload or weapons transition you will actually for a very brief time have the advantage.
    There's a saying, "live to fight another day." How about, "live to fight another minute?"

    Let's say you hit the deck and successfully survived the first burst of rounds. On the way down you were aware enough to notice that this BG is wielding an AR and outfitted pretty damn close a SWAT guy. (I think new reports say ballistic helmet w/ visor, neck guard, ballistic vest, groin guard, ballistic leggings.) Now what?

    There's a saying "don't bring a knife to a gunfight". In this situation when the opponent is so heavily armored, it seems my 9mm JHP is pretty close to the proverbial knife. So, should I pull out my handgun and try to hit some weak spots, such as his hands, etc? This kind of shot is not so easy, even in a brightly lit shooting range on a stationary paper target.

    So let's talk gear. How can we be better prepared to resist heavily armored threat? As of now, my choice of carry ammo is 9mm JHP. But now I'm thinking about hitting up a gun show and securing some AP rounds. As for legality, I did look it up: AP ammo is legal private individuals to buy/sell/own, albeit a bit expensive because manufacturers can only sell to LEO and military, so essentially you're on the market for "grandfathered" rounds.

    What do you guys think? And are there any people in here with law enforcement/military background trained to deal with armored threats? What's your choice of sidearm gun and round?
    You survive his initial volley into the crowd. This is where your weapons capacity can make or break you. This is also why it is very important to practice firing while moving. While he is in the process of reloading or transitioning to another weapon you need to be putting rounds on target. Even if you are hitting armor and not flesh it is going to reduce his ability to function. Fire and advance. If you can put rounds on target at the rate of about one round per second (they don't have to be X ring, 7 ring or better should be effective) while walking up to him you have a chance. This is where training and practice come in. This is why we practice tactical reloads. This is why your reload is in your weak hand when you come up shooting. If you are able to count your rounds drop your mag and reload before slide lock. Assuming he doesn't throw down his weapons and surrender you need to sustain fire on him until you close the distance necessary for a kill shot. Advance advance advance.

    I commented in another thread how that night I went to my local dollar theater and clunked getting into my seat. I then wondered if just going to the movies I could pack lighter. I had my light on one hip and I had my fanny pack with my P228 (with an 18 round P226 mag in it) and a 15 round reload. My carry round is Winchester Ranger 127grain +P+.

    Would I have been able to stop the guy? I don't know and I hope to never have to find out. But what I had with me that night definitely would have given me a fighting chance.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  5. #79
    Member Array JodyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by armado View Post
    in my town there are no fire arms allowed signs at the box office window. I will obey the law and go un armed to the movies or just stay home. There are no other choices.
    Per NM statute 30-14-6 a sign prohibiting concealed carry on private property must meet the following criteria.
    Is the sign a minimum of 144 sq. inches?
    Does it state that firearms are prohibited legibly in English?
    Is the name of the business and a contact number for the business printed legibly in English on the sign?
    Is this sign posted at every apparent entrance to the establishment?

    If the posting does not meet ALL of those requirements it's not a legal posting in New Mexico and you can walk right past it.
    I've NEVER seen a legally posted business in NM.
    A small sign stating "No weapons allowed" at the ticket window is NOT a legal posting.
    It MUST be a large sign (12"x12"), in legible English and posted at every entrance to the property.

  6. #80
    Member Array bowserb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Houston, Texas USA
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by wjh2657 View Post
    ... 1911 .45 ACP (the weapon I carried in Nam btw), is not an effective counter measure to an assault rifle.
    I agree with you, but please don't join with the liberal press calling the semiauto AR-15 an "assault rifle". Thanks.
    Bill
    "If I were the Devil, I'd take from those who have and give to those who wanted until I had killed the incentive of the ambitious."-Paul Harvey, 1964

  7. #81
    GH
    GH is online now
    VIP Member Array GH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,231
    If I you had brought your handgun into that theater in Colorado...

    You would have been blinded by the tear gas & dripping snot just like everyone else. Not to mention the desire to empty your bladder. If your family was with you, you should have been looking for their safety, not drawing fire in their direction.

    Not to say that if you had a clear head shot close enough to see that there was no innocents in your line of fire that you shouldn't have tried to neutralize him. Had you been that close to him you would probably have been dead or dying by that time.
    Glenn

    USN Submarine & UDT/SEAL Veteran
    1SG, US Army Retired - Airborne Infantry All the Way!
    Special Warfare Mentor
    M&P40, M&P40C

  8. #82
    Member Array JodyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    79
    Mindset
    Tactics
    Skill
    Equipment

    Prepared by the U.S. Urban Warfare Analysis Center:

    Executive Summary:

    In May 2004, approximately 20 British troops in Basra were ambushed and forced out of their vehicles by about 100 Shiite militia fighters. When ammunition ran low, the British troops fixed bayonets and charged the enemy. About 20 militiamen were killed in the assault without any British deaths.

    The bayonet charge appeared to succeed for three main reasons. First, the attack was the first of its kind in that region and captured the element of surprise. Second, enemy fighters probably believed jihadist propaganda stating that coalition troops were cowards unwilling to fight in close combat, further enhancing the element of surprise. Third, the strict discipline of the British troops overwhelmed the ability of the militia fighters to organize a cohesive counteraction.

    The effects of this tactical action in Basra are not immediately applicable elsewhere, but an important dominant theme emerges regarding the need to avoid predictable patterns of behavior within restrictive rules of engagement. Commanders should keep adversaries off balance with creative feints and occasional shows of force lest they surrender the initiative to the enemy.

    I. Overview of Bayonet Charge
    On 21 May 2004, Mahdi militiamen engaged a convoy consisting of approximately 20 British troops from the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders 55 miles north of Basra. A squad from the Princess of Wales regiment came to their assistance. What started as an attack on a passing convoy ended with at least 35 militiamen dead and just three British troops wounded. The militiamen engaged a force that had restrictive rules of engagement prior to the incident that prevented them from returning fire. What ensued was an example of irregular warfare by coalition troops that achieved a tactical victory over a numerically superior foe with considerable firepower.

    The Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders are an infantry regiment of the British Army with a rich history. It is one of Scotland’s oldest fighting forces. It is best known for forming the legendry “thin red line” at the Battle of Balaklava in the Crimean War against Russia in 1854. It later fought with distinction in World War I and World War II, including intense jungle warfare in Malaya. After Iraq, it served in Afghanistan before returning home in2008.


    Country: United Kingdom
    Branch: Army, 16th Air Assault Brigade
    Type: One of six Scottish line infantry regiments
    Role: Air assault-Light role
    Motto: Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

    No One Assails Me With Impunity

    Atmosphere Preceding the Attack

    After a period of relative calm, attacks escalated after coalition forces attempted to arrest Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. British soldiers in southern Iraq said they were “stunned” by the level of violence near Basra. In particular, Mahdi militiamen conducted regular ambushes on British convoys on the roads between Basra and Baghdad.Frequent, uncoordinated attacks inflicted little damage, although precise data is unavailable in open sources. Since the Scottish and Welsh troops arrived in Basra, Shiite militias averaged about five attacks per day in Basra.


    The Bayonet Charge


    The battle began when over 100 Mahdi army fighters ambushed two unarmored vehicles transporting around 20 Argylls on the isolated Route Six highway near the southern city of Amarah. Ensconced in trenches along the road, the militiamen fired mortars, rocket propelled grenades, and machine gun rounds. The vehicles stopped and British troops returned fire. The Mahdi barrage caused enough damage to force the troops to exit the vehicles.The soldiers quickly established a defensive perimeter and radioed for reinforcements from the main British base at Amarah – Camp Abu Naji. Reinforcements from the Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment assisted the Argyles in an offensive operation against the Mahdi militiamen. When ammunition ran low among the British troops, the decision was made to fix bayonets for a direct assault.



    The British soldiers charged across 600 feet of open ground toward enemy trenches. They engaged in intense hand-to-hand fighting with the militiamen. Despite being outnumbered and lacking ammunition, the Argylls and Princess of Wales troops routed the enemy. The British troops killed about 20 militiamen in the bayonet charge and between 28 and 35 overall. Only three British soldiers were injured.This incident marked the first time in 22 years that the British Army used bayonets in action. The previous incident occurred during the Falklands War in 1982.




    II. Why the Bayonet Charge Was a Tactical Success

    The bayonet charge by British troops in Basra achieved tactical success primarily because of psychological and cultural factors. It also shows that superior firepower does not guarantee success by either side. In this case, the value of surprise, countering enemy expectations, and strict troop discipline were three deciding characteristics of the bayonet charge.


    Surprise as a Weapon


    The Mahdi fighters likely expected the British convoy to continue past the attack. Previous convoys of British vehicles had driven through ambush fire. British military sources believe the militiamen miscalculated the response of the convoy and expected the Scots to flee.

    • Although the raid is a well-honed tactic practiced by jihadist and Arab irregulars, the surprise raid has been an effective tool against Arab armies, both regular and irregular.


    Irregular fighters usually are not trained in the rigid discipline that professional counterparts possess, and the surprise attack exploits this weakness.


    Enemy Expectation that Coalition Troops Would Avoid Combat


    Propaganda by Sunni and Shiite jihadists regularly advertised the perception that American and British soldiers were cowards. Similar rhetoric increased after the battles of Fallujah in April2004, perhaps to steady the resolve of militia fighters in the face of aggressive coalition attacks.


    In addition, British convoys did not engage significantly during previous ambushes, which probably validated the narrative for many Mahdi militiamen. Because many of the Mahdi fighters were teenagers, it is also likely that the Mahdi army used these ambushes for training and recruiting. The attacks were an opportunity for young fighters to use weapons in combat with little risk of serious reprisal.

    • In short, the bayonet charge not only surprised the Mahdi militiamen, it also debunked the perception that coalition troops were reluctant fighters seeking to avoid conflict.



    "I wanted to put the fear of God into the enemy. I could see some dead bodies and eight blokes, some scrambling for their weapons. I’ve never seen such a look of fear in anyone’s eyes before. I’m over six feet; I was covered in sweat, angry, red in the face, charging in with a bayonet and screaming my head off. You would be scared, too."

    Corporal Brian Wood
    Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment



    "There was a lot of aggression and a lot of hand-to-hand fighting. It wasn’t a pleasant scene. Some did get cut with the blades of the bayonet as we tumbled around, but in the end, they surrendered and were controlled. I do wonder how they regard life so cheaply. Some of these Iraqis in those trenches were 15 years old – against trained soldiers."

    Colonel Mark Byers
    Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment

    Strict Discipline

    A crucial distinction during the bayonet charge was the professional discipline of the British troops in contrast to the disunity and confusion of the militia fighters. Irregular militia often fight with passion and benefit from knowledge of the local terrain. Professional soldiers, however, formally trained in tactics and squad unity can often overcome these and other obstacles. During the bayonet charge, the soldiers rarely lost their nerve and not a single soldier lost his life.


    Many of the militiamen fled.

  9. #83
    Senior Member Array The Old Anglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Orlando,Fl
    Posts
    659
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    People get wrapped up on this body armor thing, thinking that it makes someone invincible. It does not.

    One of the perps in the Hollywood shootout was killed when a SWAT officer shot the guy through the foot, dropping him to the ground.

    If shooting at an apparent spot doesn't work, you have to have enough presence of thought to try something else. A bullet proof vest will not stop repeated hits in the same area.

    Shoot for the legs, the feet, the arms, you gotta do what you gotta do to make the threat cease.
    if you don't have the proper mentality then stay out of the fight. Even if you do have it and you do everything correctly you may die.

    I have been an advocate of carrying full sized handguns for years, just for situations like this. The pipsqueak guns aren't going to do it. If you have the right mindset and the wrong tools, it wont do it. You are already at a disadvantage because you have brought a handgun to a rifle fight.

    I participated in a active shooter scenario at a Junior High several years ago, where the "perp" had boiler plate wrapped around him and he was armed with a 9MM AR. He had taken many simunition "hit' to his torso and people kept shooting there because that is what they were trained to do. It was a drill that was controlled and then critiqued. When my turn came up, I popped him a couple of times and then went to the knees and groin area and kept shooting until they called it.

    When I was asked why I shot where I did, I told them that shooting that boiler plate wasn't doing any good, that I had to do something. They commended me, saying that it was the right thing to do.

    All of us on my dept had done active shooter scenarios before, but they thought they would throw a kink in the plan. All we were told was to respond to a man with a gun. Communications were also critiqued, and several of the guys never mentioned that the shooter was armored up. Had they done that, more officers would have responded with the appropriate weapons rather than just showing up with handguns.

    Something else to think about.

    Thus far, in mass shootings, we have been very fortunate to have for the most part, whack jobs that didn't have much of a clue about shooting or killing.

    I have always thought that one or two guys with a clue, being gun people and having the right backgrounds could make a active shooter event and absolute night mare for first responders or any one that was unarmed.

    The shooter at Aurora, according to reports was brilliant and at the top of his class. He popped smoke, wore a gas-mask and started shooting. It's a miracle that no more people were killed than there were.He had a well thought out plan and he stuck with it, and one thing that liberals and the news media will ignore is the fact that he chose a target rich environment to do it. He had little threat, if any, of opposition.

    I've said many times that if you are qualified to carry a gun,then there is no reason not to be able to carry it anywhere and everywhere. NO GUN zones exist for one reason and one reason only...to placate anti-gun people that generally don't have a clue about reality.
    The fools that go screaming for more gun laws are just that...fools making a lot of noise about something they know nothing about. They think that passing a law that is the right way to go, because they are too ignorant to understand that a law does nothing to prevent a crime, it only serves as an enforcement mechanism after the fact.

    Lets repeal those worthless laws,and give anyone that would, at least a fighting chance. Any chance is better than no chance and at least there is hope that you just might get lucky and live.

    As for me, I am tired of stupid laws that give the advantage to an attacker. I am tired of the weak mindsets of people that give up before they even get started because they think they are doomed to failure. I am tired of the talking heads telling me that I am responsible for the acts of a lawbreaker that broke the law 3 states over because I own an "assault weapon". I am tired of people expecting us to bleat like sheep in the face of aggression. I am tired of this me,me, me mentality where someone could have stopped and assault but didn't because their weapons was only for them or their family.

    I wish that everyone that could, if in the same situation, would man up and kill the offender and do it with a passion, a purpose, that would make every single person that ever thought about it at least give pause. I wish that as Americans, we would all possess a warrior mentality were you knew you were dead went you intervened so that you could fight an attacker like you were demon possessed, that if all you had for a weapons was a straw in a cup full of coke, you would grab that straw with your thumb over the end of it and try to screw it through the offenders eye ball.

    I'm tired of this wussy thought process of laying down and hoping that you wont get hurt, and that maybe the attacker wont see you.

    Its not the way I was raised, its not the way I was trained and its not me.

    Since you asked, there is my thoughts on it.

    For those that would slam me for my opinion, thats OK, I dont expect most of you to understand it.
    Very Profound Statement,I also Agree and is the reason I carry a full size 1911 .45ACP. Armor or not a 230 grain hardball at 850fps will knock him down.Then comes the ugly part.

  10. #84
    New Member Array mc1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    3

    Theater shooting

    There are a lot of ifs and maybes in this tragedy. One might be that no matter what anyone did the result is the same or worse.

    Another option would be to destroy his gas mask by firing a weapon into it, laying low and if he walked up the aisle way put some point blank rounds in his face.

    Monday morning quarterbacking may help us think about this but in the moment of truth things get murkier.

    Mayor Bloomberg and others think restricting the ability of law abiding citizens to defend them self is the answer. I think the complete opposite.

  11. #85
    Member Array brookl089's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by BubbaDX View Post
    This! I think he would have broken off the attack and retreated to see how badly he was injured.
    Bubba, You are 100% RIGHT. This coward would have retreated if this happened in Minnesota. In this State, he would have met me in the movie theater and I guarantee a hail of 147gr HST's would be zinging at him. Assult weapon or not. A few months ago my girlfriend thought I was crazy for carrying at a movie theater. Now, she thinks differently and has registered for a CCW class. Oh, we are going to the gun range today too....my 15 year old daughter is coming too. Everyone better purchase your guns and police ammo before the Obama folks restrict lawful access. It's too bad the world has come to this point but we have to take measures to give us a chance to change the outcome.

  12. #86
    Senior Member Array RubenZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    RGV,Tx
    Posts
    560
    I don't think the crowd matters much. I'm sure the crowd would be away from the shooter. The problem is most people there were probably under age of 21 and don't have the right mindset to be a sheepdog.
    Glock 20sf, Glock 19 gen4, Glock 26 gen3, Colt 1911 Series 80

  13. #87
    VIP Member Array Brad426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,748
    Quote Originally Posted by RubenZ View Post
    I don't think the crowd matters much. I'm sure the crowd would be away from the shooter. The problem is most people there were probably under age of 21 and don't have the right mindset to be a sheepdog.
    You need to watch the video of the 71-year-old man that shoots the would-be robbers in the internet cafe and how - in a much less chaotic setting - the innocents wander into his line of fire.
    I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
    Clint Eastwood

  14. #88
    Member Array brookl089's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob99VMI04 View Post
    His act alone was an act of cowardice. He walked into a crowded theatre and executed unarmed people. This is why he didn't go into an known armed location for his rampage. This was not an act of insanity, this was a clear, well thought out execution, however it was poorly executed. he had the means to do a lot more, however, he chickened out when he was confronted. If he was insane or not a coward he would continued his rampage instead of giving up when comfronted. He knew what he doing, and when cowards are confronted they give up because they are no longer in total control. We have seen this on the many shootings in which the shooters committ suicide, because they do not have the intestinaly fortiitude to face somebody actually fighting back with equal lethal force. I believe if somebody would have shot back (BA or no BA) the outcome may have been very differn't.
    Agreed. I've read the other posts regarding "collateral damage" but when complete anarchy is happening within a kill zone...I'm sure collateral damage is authorized.

  15. #89
    VIP Member Array Brad426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,748
    Quote Originally Posted by brookl089 View Post
    Agreed. I've read the other posts regarding "collateral damage" but when complete anarchy is happening within a kill zone...I'm sure collateral damage is authorized.
    Nice. Here's a cheat sheet for you... collateral damage is never "authorized" for citizens carrying concealed weapons. Good luck with that as your defense in front of a jury (even if your actions may have saved other lives).
    Last edited by Brad426; July 22nd, 2012 at 02:30 PM.
    I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
    Clint Eastwood

  16. #90
    VIP Member Array Rob99VMI04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NOVA...200 square miles surrounded by reality
    Posts
    3,182
    Quote Originally Posted by forcifer View Post
    Thanks for all your input and replies.

    First, I would like to say, I really like all the "fight" attitudes we have in here. I'm all for fighting. Otherwise I wouldn't be on this forum. That being said, I would like to move this thread into thinking on a more strategic level. Because let's be honest: being all gung-ho and rambo and rushing at the shooter right away will probably just land you (and those around you) in the coffin faster than anyone else in that theater.

    There's a saying, "live to fight another day." How about, "live to fight another minute?"

    Let's say you hit the deck and successfully survived the first burst of rounds. On the way down you were aware enough to notice that this BG is wielding an AR and outfitted pretty damn close a SWAT guy. (I think new reports say ballistic helmet w/ visor, neck guard, ballistic vest, groin guard, ballistic leggings.) Now what?

    There's a saying "don't bring a knife to a gunfight". In this situation when the opponent is so heavily armored, it seems my 9mm JHP is pretty close to the proverbial knife. So, should I pull out my handgun and try to hit some weak spots, such as his hands, etc? This kind of shot is not so easy, even in a brightly lit shooting range on a stationary paper target.

    So let's talk gear. How can we be better prepared to resist heavily armored threat? As of now, my choice of carry ammo is 9mm JHP. But now I'm thinking about hitting up a gun show and securing some AP rounds. As for legality, I did look it up: AP ammo is legal private individuals to buy/sell/own, albeit a bit expensive because manufacturers can only sell to LEO and military, so essentially you're on the market for "grandfathered" rounds.

    What do you guys think? And are there any people in here with law enforcement/military background trained to deal with armored threats? What's your choice of sidearm gun and round?
    Unfortunatly there are no absolutes in this....I also think your barking up the wrong tree by trying to procure AP rounds for your pistol to deal this type of threat. Most situations are not going to be like this. Therefore your pentrating rounds are going to just keep on going. You run many risks of using rounds that over pentrate. Also, out of all the years of shooting i have never even seen pistol AP rounds for sale on the civilian market. Therefore, good luck getting proffecient with the load.

    Your gun and your ammo is not the weapon. Your weapon is between your ears.
    10thmtn likes this.
    “Are you a thermometer or a thermostat, do you reflect or become what is happening in the room or do you change the atmosphere, reset the temperature when you come into the room”?--Chuck Swindoll

    Its not about guns...Its about Freedom!

Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

aurora shooter armor
,
can i bring a gun into a movie theater in colorado
,
can you carry a concealed weapon into a movie theater
,
can you carry a gun in a movie theater in colorado
,
can you carry a gun into a movie theater in colorado
,

can you conceal carry in a movie theater

,
can you take a, concealed carry weapon in a movie theater
,

colorado shooter armor

,
what armor was the colorado shooter using
,

what kind of body armor did the colorado shooter have

,
what kind of body armor did the colorado shooter use
,

what was the colorado killer wearing

Click on a term to search for related topics.