Regal Cinema's new "security policy"
- Thread starter soberups
- Start date
That scenario is just as likely to occur as.the CCW hero saving the day. Actually far more likely since there are many more innocent bystanders than there are potential gun toting heroes. Strictly statistically speaking that is.
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
Since you are reduced to idiocy, I guess I win.
Idiocy is an upgrade from what he (she?) usually has to offer.
Lineandinitial
Legio patria nostra
You were doing well until you made up that "statictically speaking" comment.
What if the CCW guy was trained and experienced? I can say without any hesitation that "Probably" all CCW's are experienced and trained at some level. You need training to obtain a CCW or at least show that you are not a bumbling idiot that you LW's think are running around without any restraint of common sense.
The scenario of an innocent bystander getting shot accidently is possible, but just as likely as the shooter getting hit.
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
How often do you have to re-certify/qualify?
I'm really impressed that this thread has such defenders for the conceal carry hero in this scenario.
Why? Because as you said, CC implies some level of responsible training. That's good. Because in that is ingrained not to fire into a crowd. Not to fire blindly. Firing in a crowded, smoky, chaotic theater should be so against the grain that it almost never happens. And I think that's the case because CC folks need to know that their responsibility does not end at.good intentions. Don't you agree they should be aware of those facts? The road to hell....
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
Incorrect.
The mass murderer is shooting at everyone in the theater. The guy with the carry permit is only shooting at the murderer.
Do you have a CCW permit and if so, do you have any training?Since you are reduced to idiocy, I guess I win.
In this whole thread, what is your point?
Just to debate?
Incorrect. I have never seen a mass murderer kill everyone. They have, however, been held accountable for those innocents they killed. Nothing wrong with that, is there?
trickpony1
Well-Known Member
Nope......unless you're one of the innocents they killed.
Right.
Wrong country but of course you miss the point anyway.
you miss the point in this whole thread...
Go ahead. Enlighten me.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
I do. The "training" is a joke.
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
Ok, I'll bite...
People are held accountable for crimes that they are charged with and convicted of.
The guy who walks into a theater with an AR-15 and starts blasting away will be charged and convicted of first degree murder for every person he kills.
The guy with a carry permit who shoots back in self defense and accidentally kills someone who got caught in the crossfire will be charged with....what?
Under the circumstances of a mass shooting, what would be the appropriate crime to charge him with, and would a jury convict?
I really shouldn't get involved in this thread, but in my county and my state, all I have to do is go down the the sheriff's office, fill out some paperwork, pay the fee and wait for a cursory background check.
No experience and no training involved.
I don't know. Could be any array of charges depending on the local, state, and federal laws. Could be violating the innocent victims civil liberties. What he won't and shouldn't do is walk away with no repercussions of a mistake that caused another to lose their life. Then there is the possibility that after months of civil and legal proceedings he is exonerated but still there is a court of public opinion. He may never be seen the way he wants, the way you say it should be. He may never be seen as a "good samaritan".
Too extreme? That's the responsibility that comes with shooting to kill. There isn't a lot of room for error. I think gun owners should realize that, don't you?
Similar threads
