.357 Mag ...Period

Status
Not open for further replies.
JohnKSAI take exception to the fact that you assumed that if I had been there, seeing the BG not in armor I would turn a "bullet hose" loose in a darkened theater with no thought as to what was behind the target.
Before you posted your reply I realized that I had misread your post and had already edited my post to reflect that fact. I apologize for the misunderstanding.
...if I'm there and I do have a shot I want to be able to stop him rather than have him continue!
I'm not saying not to try, just pointing out that (given the information we've been provided so far) the odds are very poor of doing anything other than causing a momentary diversion. That is, of course, unless the shooter decides to give up at the first sign of armed resistance.
I have now heard from several independent sources, that the reports of this guy having armor over his entire body are not true.
I watched the official press conference on Friday evening and I'm quite certain that the Aurora Chief of Police indicated that Holmes was wearing body armor including a ballistic helmet, trunk & pelvis protection, neck protection and limb protection.
Probably 50 yards from front to back. One heck of a shot from a CCW gun...
I concur. I practice at 25 yards with my carry gun and can hold groups about 4.5" at that range. Under ideal conditions. Just getting a hit, let alone a pinpoint hit that might take effect through armor, would be tough under the conditions described and at the ranges possibly involved.
 
I suggest if one is thinking of stopping a 'batman' style attack then don't spend much time worrying about the particular weapon to use.

Whatever you carry, be it a 2 inch snub, Glock, H&K, Ruger, S&W M&P, etc... spend time practicing and practicing and practicing with what you got!

For you see it's not the weapon but what needs to be done with whatever weapon you have that matters.

Yes the snubs are harder and the 1911 SAs easier but when the gong sounds you fight with what you have. So practice till with whatever you have you can hit a moving head and say 5 yards, one handed EVERY TIME. Even with someone jostling you.

For that is what you are going to need to be able to do. Yes head shot. I call it COS (center of skull) shot.

Hard to do? Yes. But for a possibly armored target with many bystanders there is no other solution.

Why COS?

A) One presumes a nutjob has armor as they planned to kill so many so COM is no-go.

B) A CNS shot is most likely to stop them right there compared to any other shot and largest CNS target is a COS.

C) If you lower yourself a bit then the round, if it misses the head, will not hit anyone else. A pelvis shot does not offer that.

Deaf
 
Hard to argue with what you said about a head shot Deaf, but I'm with John on the circumstances you think you could have made that shot in that situation? I wouldn't have even tried. In the abstract a tin can at that distance with my plinker I carried for years (6 1/2" barrel adjustable sights) you bet, that tin can would be toast! my CCW 2" barrel, fixed sights. I know darn well I couldn't make that shot.
I wonder if he calculated that he was less likely to meet up with armed resistance from the crowd because they were the wrong demographic for concealed carry holders (mostly kids).
 
I've been listening to armchair quarterbacks all weekend at work, and I'll tell folks here the same things I told them.

First, the idea that one could possibly make a head shot in a situation like that betrays a lack of understanding of how such situations unfold, and how quickly.

Second, if I were to engage the shooter in a situation like this, I wouldn't be around to brag to the guys at the gun shop about it. Doing so would ensure that I would be the primary target of a sociopath (look it up and read the personality profile) who has superior equipment and less to lose than I do. My last act would hopefully be to buy some time for others to escape, but it may possibly incite a higher level of desperation and/or aggression in the shooter.

This isn't about hardware, or what might or might not defeat body armor. It's not about Miami Vice Mozambique drills. The gun is not the solution to every problem.
 
JohnKSa wrote:
Quote:
in a scenario such as this we must throw out the COM concept. Like the N. Hollywood shoot out; if that is what you practice that is what you'll do. We saw how that turned out.

One must consider any and all available holes in the armor system. Arms, more specifically the area in the vest that the arms come out from is one such place. The white triangle is another possibility. Head, knee caps, feet, ankles/ lower legs (a N. Hollywood game changer) are all on the list. There is no chance to go forward of the line to score your shots and determine what's going on. It's dark, it's smoky, there's an irritant in the air, there are people screaming and running around and the bad guy is dressed in dark clothing and shooting back.

In that environment, a CCW'er is supposed to be able to score his hits well enough to realize that the bad guy is armored before his compact carry gun runs dry? Or visually assess the target with enough accuracy to determine he's armored before opening fire? I don't think so.

Let's assume he's really that good. So now, after only expending a few rounds (or none if he's sharp enough to visually detect body armor), our fearless hero realizes he's got to shoot not for a man-sized target, but for a head-sized or smaller target. Still in the dark, still with a moving target, and with someone shooting back through the smoke and irritants in the air. People are screaming, running, getting shot, getting trampled, but now our defender is somehow able to adjust his aim and, with the few shots in his carry pistol, without being shot himself, he threads the needle to hit the weak points in the armor. That might make a good movie, but it's pure fantasy, in my opinion.


Had you read just a little further you would have seen and taken into context:

In a cloud of smoke or tear gas, with your adrenaline pumping in the general panic you will be lucky to be thinking straight let alone analyzing the target for weaknesses.

This simple one line takes into account the average CCW holder that has not ever or does not as a matter of daily routine have to deal with high stress life critical situations. Short of someone coming from a theater of war not to many people are mentally prepared to deal with this kind of a situation.

In the general scope of this kind of horrific tragic event we find ourselves facing an anomaly within an anomaly. The first is a scenario where we have a mass casualty situation the anomaly within is the creator of this situation is wearing body armor. I can only think of two situations within my lifetime that these two things have occurred simultaneously...North Hollywood and the current event.

Unfortunately, some scenarios don't have solutions that can be practically planned for.

It is certainly true that there are some things that can be done that might have a positive impact on the outcome, but the idea that a person dressed in street clothes with a handgun permit is going to turn a situation like this around in a few well-placed shots just isn't remotely realistic.

While I agree with these sentiments, I and many other also believe that if I am going down, I might as well try to take the @$^#& with me. I have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
 
Short of someone coming from a theater of war not to many people are mentally prepared to deal with this kind of a situation.
I'd go farther and say that even an experienced and skilled warrior armed like a typical CCW'er would be would still be in a pickle. It's not just a matter of lacking mental preparation, it's a matter of the situation being "unwinnable" given the tools available to even a very-well prepared and experienced CCW'er out to watch a movie. People just don't go out on the town with the tools they need to engage a well-prepared, armored rifleman bent on mass murder. It's totally impractical to do so.

It's also not just a matter of not being able to assess the target rapidly, it's a matter of not being able to adequately make use of that information under the circumstances of the scenario under discussion. Knowing how to solve the problem (pinpoint hits on small moving targets to slip bullets into unarmored areas) doesn't solve the problem because actually doing what's necessary isn't within the abilities of mortals when you consider all the complications.
I can only think of two situations within my lifetime that these two things have occurred simultaneously...
The Tyler, TX Courthouse shooting is another. His body count was limited since it took place at a courthouse/police station and there were numerous armed defenders on site, but it fits the basic model. He was engaged in broad daylight by a shooting range owner (Mark Wilson) who lived nearby. Wilson was using a full-sized .45ACP pistol and managed to score one or more hits which had no effect other than to alert Arroyo to his presence. Arroyo turned on Wilson and killed him, then left the scene. He was followed and dispatched later by an officer using a rifle.
I have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
Again, I'm not saying not to try, just pointing out that (given the information we've been provided so far) the odds are very poor of doing anything other than causing a momentary diversion.
 
would you have rushed him?

Exactly. More specifically, "what would you have been doing in the meantime while waiting for him to run dry and need to reload?" If I'm unarmed or otherwise unable to engage the shooter, I'm sure as heck not waiting around for him to reload in the hopes of being able to rush him while he does.
 
to further your point ScottRiqui

Exactly. More specifically, "what would you have been doing in the meantime while waiting for him to run dry and need to reload?" If I'm unarmed or otherwise unable to engage the shooter, I'm sure as heck not waiting around for him to reload in the hopes of being able to rush him while he does.

searching for an exit, dealing with the surprise, carnage, dark theater, tear gas, tending to family members, etc, etc.....if you were right near him he would've shot you unless you were lucky enough to duck away and he happened to focus on someone else. and if you weren't close enough, you wouldn't have been clamoring over bodies, people running, chairs to "rush this guy". in fact, you wouldn't be looking at him and know exactly when he needed to reload. you probably would've had your face kissing the floor and then wondered what was going on when the shots stopped momentarily.
 
Youngunz after reading all of these posts I would hope that would Be the conclusion(rushing him)
I would have come to.
Wait for his next reload try to get close enough to engage him with my CCW. I would have already assumed it would be a tactic that would get me killed. Worst case, the rounds he put into me would save the others they could have gone into. Hopefully my body stays functional long enough for me to get close enough to get that headshot Ol' Deaf was advocating.
I can't imagine being at the theatre without my family. If he's shooting at me maybe they(or at least someone) can escape. I can't think of anything else that we've read here that gives better odds of killing him or at least saving as many people as possible.
We've talked over and over again about how hard it is to kill a determined/adrenalized opponent. My family is behind me, it would take a lot of damage to stop me. If I'm running towards him he has to hit a swiftly moving target in smoke filled darkness, I'm using the conditions to my advantage at that point. Best odds I can think of. I would hope I was man enough for the task.

"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends"
 
P.S. Youngunz
If I remember correctly that was the sort of dilemma that caused Adm Farragut to utter his famous line about "Damn the torpedoes":)
 
scrubcedar

If I remember correctly that was the sort of dilemma that caused Adm Farragut to utter his famous line about "Damn the torpedoes"

Not quite, but I catch your drift. I guess you could say the heck with it and charge the guy if you make that decision conclusively. Obviously you don't want to draw attention to your family though, and they want you around for family BBQs and summer vacations. He probably would've instinctively drew a handgun to fire if you charged him, but now I am speculating. I just don't see much of an opportunity here to engage this clown, but if the opportunity presents itself, why not? You don't hear about it often such as bank robberies, etc but that 71yr old man in FL deserves a reward(recently drew his CCW and engaged armed teenagers robbing a cafe). I wish i could remember where that picture was posted on TFL: the CCW FL guy contrasted to the CO theater
 
You'll likely exhaust your 5 or 6 rounds before you determine he has armor.
Given that he didn't really want to fight, just murder defenseless people since he gave up without a fight, that may have been enough. He had an avenue of retreat, through the exit.
 
Killing people or killing building?

What's your point?

SHR970 Post #33


where there is a will there is a way.

Marvin Heemeyer Grand Lake Co.


Did this person kill, 12, and injure 58?

That was kind of a cool wrecker, they should make a movie about it, but I saw a few engineerings flew's.

POINT? IT"S ALL OFF TOPIC NOW!!!
 
New post

Just take an solid bar of iron in the rotating tracks. I think that might have derailed one of his track's.

Well, that' the first thing that came to my mind.
 
I think that the truth is that you will do exactly what you have trained to do, nothing more or less. If you have a warrior mindset and have been exposed to training that says take the fight to the threat, you will, outgunned or not. The key is the training. Yes, it might cost you your life but the warrior is on auto pilot, pre programmed to respond to the threat. And not from a bonsai suicidal standpoint but from a locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver perspective. Of course the vast majority of people have neither the mindset nor the training. If they do carry, it is with little training other than some plinking at bullseye targets. I would not expect these folks to do anything other than to immediately protect only themselves and family members while trying to escape. It is simply a product of training.

Regarding carry choices. Off duty, I carry the .357 magnum in a 5 shot snub with a speed strip all of the time and will continue to do so. My choice of round is not over penetrative. I have been thinking about a second similar gun on my person at all times, in a pocket holster. No matter what, if a crazed murderous individual with a rifle goes on the rampage, I will be behind the eight ball. But, I am secure in the knowledge that I will do what I have been trained to do.
 
lots of great speculation..til someone is actually shooting at you..no disrespect to anyone on here as ive never been shot at..but i really think it happened pretty fast and that the main issue wouldve been preservation of family...that guy was doing alota shooting...gonna pek yer head over the seat so he can get a shot right thru the back of the chair at ya....
 
I have now heard from several independent sources, that the reports of this guy having armor over his entire body are not true. That in fact he had no ballistic armor. He was wearing a "tactical" vest with no ballistic armor characteristics. Maybe not true, but I think it is odd we know exactly what firearms he had, but no details on the armor. There was a police shield photographed at the scene. Anyone have a source to exactly what he was wearing?

I enjoyed the comments to the effect of "if it can't be done by ten, then you shouldn't be doing it." I have attended several movie premiers specifically and have had quite a few enjoyable times after ten. If it can't be done from inside a bricked in house maybe it also should not be done.

I went to the theater today. Probably 50 yards from front to back. One heck of a shot from a CCW gun, especially with all the rest going on. Armor is soft around the joints. It has to be. You can't trauma plate the hips. It usually has seams and it "folds." Round to the hips are probably the best idea and I think have a decent chance of success if the person is wearing II-IIIA. Even then, if the person is just down, they can still shoot, especially if they are on drugs.

THe best strategy is a rush though. If all 71 shot had rushed him he wouldn't have had time to get 71 shots off. Of course, how in the world are you going to organize that? It just won't happen. It took the passengers how long to organize a rush on 9/11? Even after they had all the information? That was against box cutters.

From what I read he was wearing a Tactical Vest.

Goes to show you what liberal reporters know. Nothing.

I also heard/read AR-15 or AK47 used interchangeably.

A 357 wouldn't penetrate a Class 3A but the person getting shot would still be badly hurt. I have a S&W 627 8 round 357. Excellent!
 
.357 mag... period

Code:
has anyone CCW'd a chiappa Rhino 40ds. 4" .357mag?
Code:

i have. i happened to have a uncle mikes iwb holster that works well with my 40ds. i LOVE carrying it. i usually go small of back with it, and have no problems whatsoever, the gun conceals like my glocks, and .357 rounds have very little muzzle flip in this gun, wonderful gun and design.

god bless the families of this terrible tragedy. god bless the family of the disturbed individual responsible.
 
Of course this is all Monday morning quarterback, so what?

Lots of new thought about self defense which is all to the good. The most realistic way to have stopped it cold would have been a bullet in the felons face.

Lasers anyone?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top