Concealed Handguns vs Orlando terrorism last night

T

TXAZ

New member
According to numerous news reports at least 20 are dead and 40 wounded after an FBI agent described "domestic act of terrorism" happened last night in Orlando.

***Without*** getting into politics and religion, there is a simple question: Would a CCW / LTC / CHL made a significant difference last night, and why.

http://http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-orlando-shooting-pulse-nightclub-story.html

http://www.bbc.com/news/36510272

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/06/12/fbi-gunman-orlando-mass-shooting-linked-radical-islamic-terrorismfbi-orlando-gunman-may
 
Last edited:
Possibly yes and possibly no. Say you have you CCW and chose to engage. 1 police officer involved, then 2 more according to the local news this morning. Good chance of you being shot by the PD already on the scene with the PD not knowing YOU are one of the good guys, shoots you or the CCW that decided to engage.
As our pamphlets that come with the CCW licenses and what we stress while teaching the CCW courses, having the permit does not make you the CCW holder a free lance police officer
 
Last edited:
I agree it really just depends. If the guy starts shooting and I’m across the room I'm running to the nearest exit. However, if the guy is between me and the exit and does not see me then I “might” have the opportunity to neutralize him. The reality is there is no way of knowing for certain, but given the choice I would prefer to be armed as not in that situation.
 
If I am going into a nightclub/bar with intent to consume alchohol,I have a lockbox to put my handgun in.
Colorado is a little vague about the standard.Technically,if you are OK to drive(A beer,maybe... 0.04 is the DWAI limit) then you are OK to carry,BUT!! There is an Officer discretion clause.If he smells alchohol on you,the BAC measurement is not a requirement.

I choose to not deal with it.If I choose to carry,I choose to not drink.

This particular situation,as described by the UK Daily Mail article,seems to be ..How may I say this in a politically correct way? An act of religious extremist terrorism?
And it was a Gay Nightclub that was attacked.

I'm certainly not a wanabe hero.I'm not a vigilante cop. I'll avoid most everything I can avoid.

And I darn sure am not going to make any claims to courage...talk is cheap.That gets proven in the moment.

I used to work as a custodian in a school.An elementary school.After Sandy Hook,I had to ask myself...What would I do?

I'm not going to make any claims.If someone walked into that school with an AR or an AK to run up a body count...
I had to ask myself.Is it better to run,get myself out? Or is it better to pick upa mop handle or whatever else I could find,and remember the movie "Little Big Man"
"Its a good day to die"

I won't give the answer.

If I'm armed and a mass slaughter is going on...I have to choose.
 
I'm not sure being armed in a crowded nightclub in the wee hours of the morning, with alcohol and drugs (I imagine) flowing freely would be advisable. Based on the accounts having a handgun probably wouldn't have hurt anything though.
 
Yes, for a variety of reasons even a licensed gun owner might not have been allowed to carry in this nightclub. We all have to make our own choices, but I stopped visit clubs several years ago because I felt the risk outweigh the reward.
 
I'll make the same two points I made after the Aurora movie theater shooting. First, I wasn't there. I don't know the exact situation, so I'm not going to armchair quarterback.

Second, even if I was, I can only envision what a tactical nightmare that scenario would be. Bright flashing lights, pounding music, people packed like sardines...how would I identify the shooter, evaluate my background, and act effectively?

So, even with my training and experience, had I been there, I may not have been able to stop him.

That said, this should not be construed as an argument against more people carrying lawfully in such places. There are a lot of mights and maybes in such a situation, but the fact that an armed citizen failed to stop this doesn't mean they won't in the future.
 
TXAZ said:
there is a simple question: Would a CCW / LTC / CHL made a significant difference last night, and why.
Click to expand...

Its entirely possible that a legally armed citizen acting as a designated driver could make a significant difference. Given the gravity of the situation there is no reasonable person who happened to be lawfully carrying that wouldn’t have been forced to take action, win or lose it would have made a difference because I don’t think these attackers consider armed citizens in these gun free zones. Unless the armed citizen is one of the initial victims he has some tactical advantage in engaging the shooter.
 
Its entirely possible that a legally armed citizen acting as a designated driver could make a significant difference. Given the gravity of the situation there is no reasonable person who happened to be lawfully carrying that wouldn’t have been forced to take action, win or lose it would have made a difference because I don’t think these attackers consider armed citizens in these gun free zones. Unless the armed citizen is one of the initial victims he has some tactical advantage in engaging the shooter.
Click to expand...

It is also entirely possible that in the crowded, chaotic environment inside the club a sober, armed citizen would understand that leaving was the only available course of action. Was the shooter moving? Firing from cover? Wearing body armor? Well trained? Too many unknowns at this time.
 
In the initial chaos, probably not. In the ensuing hostage situation, probably so.

I'm absolutely not saying any of the victims deserved this, but this is another example that nothing good happens at 2am in public. That I am "just sayin"
 
K_Mac said:
It is also entirely possible that in the crowded, chaotic environment inside the club a sober, armed citizen would understand that leaving was the only available course of action. Was the shooter moving? Firing from cover? Wearing body armor? Well trained? Too many unknowns at this time.
Click to expand...

perhaps, but that’s not the OP's question, the question is if a CCW could make a difference, which requires engaging. Whatever the circumstances its entirely possible a CCW could have stopped the shooter.
 
I'm absolutely not saying any of the victims deserved this, but this is another example that nothing good happens at 2am in public. That I am "just sayin"
Click to expand...

Amen. I think it falls under situational awareness.
 
***Without*** getting into politics and religion, there is a simple question: Would a CCW / LTC / CHL made a significant difference last night, and why.
Click to expand...


First thing to clear on this is that in Florida you can not LEGALLY carry in a bar, so I think that takes out a large segment of the CCW crowd.

The next item of question on this would be which kind of carrier?
The guy who buys a mouse gun, puts in in his pocket and doesn't train with it is not likely to have any impact the situation until maybe, as stated earlier, it has moved to the hostage stage. This might allow bad breath range response from a weapon designed for just that. The question then becomes would this person take, and make the shot? My money would be on no.

A carrier who trains with his or her weapon, knows their as well as the guns limitations may make a difference. Now it comes down again to can the shot be made in the situation. The chaos would have been horrendous. The off duty LEO manning the door engaged and didn't hit the guy. Could Joe/Josephine CCW pull one off? Possibly, without having sights in front of me, in that situation, I can not say if the shot could be made or not. I feel that a trained CCW carrier certainly could make the shot and land it if the right shot presented itself.

Lots of ifs in this situation. Conceivably make a difference, yes. Likely to, I would say leaning heavily into not really due to all the variables against it.
 
TXAZ said:
According to numerous news reports at least 20 are dead and 40 wounded after an FBI agent described "domestic act of terrorism" happened last night in Orlando.

***Without*** getting into politics and religion, there is a simple question: Would a CCW / LTC / CHL made a significant difference last night, and why.

http://http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-orlando-shooting-pulse-nightclub-story.html

http://www.bbc.com/news/36510272

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/06/...dical-islamic-terrorismfbi-orlando-gunman-may
Click to expand...
Yes, it would have possibly made a difference. Because if you have any type of CCW permit you've had some type of training. And there is stats that if someone is armed when a mass shooting starts that more times than not the shooter is stopped before a lot of people are shot. And in most cases the shooter kills themselves before the police arrive.
 
As I understand the scenario, it is all a moot point as the location was a gun free zone.

Anyone carrying would have been in violation and if caught subject to arrest and prosecution.

Whether or not he/she would have been able to resolve the conflict is up for grabs.
 
None of us posting (so far) were there.
But when a man gets the drop on you, you are always starting out at a disadvantage.
So if the murderer comes into a crowd of 100 people and starts shooting it's very likely that the first few seconds of the violence are all going to be in the favor of the mad-man.
But the dynamic that is not being addressed by the media and the "anti-crowd" is the fact that it's also very likely that 99% or more of the intended victims are disarmed by law, and also by choice (in obeying such laws)

In playing of the "what if game" we have to ask about the way that same dynamic would play out if a lone rifleman invades a crowd of 100 people who are all armed with pistols?

Because he is a LONE rifleman, the odds are high that he'll kill or wound more for his "cause" than one victim, but it's a no-brainier that his body count would be far lower if EVERYONE could shoot back and would shoot back. But that's not very PC is it?
 
the only guy/gal with a gun in a 'pretend gun free zone' is the one who wants to kill you.

if companies are going to insist on having a 'gun free' place, then it falls on them to assure that no one gets inside with a gun. including some killer who starts shooting when his feet hit the pavement. there are ways to do this, but they cost money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top