SewTexas wrote:Knowing Aurora, it is quite possible there were CHL holders in the crowd, but they couldn't carry in the theater. Aurora and Denver aren't exactly gun friendly, when we lived in Colorado Springs a few years back, Denver had managed to ban CHL's as a city, and everything in Aurora was posted.
Just to clarify, are you saying that I cannot carry within the Denver city limits? Not at all?
Perhaps Colorado does not have state preemption. Las Vegas is like that. In Vegas, they kill you if you have a CHL. And then they make excuses and blame it on the victim. Vegas keeps reelecting Harry Reid. 2+2= etc. Apparently then, parts of Colorado also teach "the new math."
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
SewTexas wrote:Knowing Aurora, it is quite possible there were CHL holders in the crowd, but they couldn't carry in the theater. Aurora and Denver aren't exactly gun friendly, when we lived in Colorado Springs a few years back, Denver had managed to ban CHL's as a city, and everything in Aurora was posted.
Just to clarify, are you saying that I cannot carry within the Denver city limits? Not at all?
Perhaps Colorado does not have state preemption. Las Vegas is like that. In Vegas, they kill you if you have a CHL. And then they make excuses and blame it on the victim. Vegas keeps reelecting Harry Reid. 2+2= etc. Apparently then, parts of Colorado also teach "the new math."
You can concealed carry in Denver, but they do ban open carry.
As for 'No Guns' signs being enforcable to prevent concealed carry, this is from http://handgunlaw.us/states/colorado.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“No Firearm” signs in Colorado have no force of law unless they are posted on property that is specifically mentioned in State Law as being off limits to those with a Permit/License to Carry. If you are in a place not specifically mentioned in the law that is posted and they ask you to leave, you must leave. If you refuse to leave then you are breaking the law and can be charged. Even if the property is not posted and you are asked to leave you must leave. Always be aware of the possibility that responding Police Officers who may have been called without your knowledge and may not know the laws on trespass etc. could arrest you even if you are within the law.
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member
74novaman wrote:Get ready for the shock of the day, y'all!!
Editor's Note: An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect. ABC News and Brian Ross apologize for the mistake, and for disseminating that information before it was properly vetted.
Mistake? ha ha ha. That was no mistake, that was deliberate use of a well known propaganda technique.....put out the lie up front when emotions are high and whisper a retraction. For many, all they'll hear or remember is that the killer was a Tea Party member, and that is exactly what ABC intended.
"Journalism, n. A job for people who flunked out of STEM courses, enjoy making up stories, and have no detectable integrity or morals."
Maybe there were CHL holders who decided to save themself and their family with a tactical retreat.
Maybe they see Zimmerman being railroaded and decided to escape instead of engage because they didn't want to get put behnd bars for defending their community.
Maybe they got tired of hearing that a CHL isn't a Batman license and decided to respect those peoples wishes and not be a hero.
Wow! This guy was prepared. Per the Police Chief at press conference: He was wearing a ballistic helmet, tactical vest, tactical leggings, groin protector, and throat protector. Not too many places for anyone to get a clear shot. The police chief said they were there within a minute and a half after they received notification of the incident. Still don't understand though why the guy ran amuck for 15 minutes before there was a 911 call made.
This is why I drive the extra 5 miles to a movie theater that does not ban me as a chl holder! Any theater that takes away my right to defend my family will not get my hard earned money! I hardly go to the movies anymore anyways because it is to expensive! Maybe it wouldn't have made a difference being that this nut job was in body armor and so many where running and there was such a panic but I rather have a fighting chance! In situations like this you either take cover, run or fight back regardless if you have a chl or not. Those are your options! When seconds count the police are not going to get there in time. You need to rely on yourself! That being said my heart goes out to all the victims and their loved ones for this senseless act of violence!
While I agree a CHL isn't a Batman License, I couldn't live with myself if people were getting hurt or killed around me and i did nothing. With that being said, if my family/friends are there, my first priority is them. But if it were just me, i'd have to do something. That doesn't necessarily mean i'd start shooting, but i'd have to try and do something. I don't go looking for trouble. I've done my best to avoid it. But all it takes for evil to succeed is the indifference of good men.
Songbird wrote:Wow! This guy was prepared. Per the Police Chief at press conference: He was wearing a ballistic helmet, tactical vest, tactical leggings, groin protector, and throat protector. Not too many places for anyone to get a clear shot. The police chief said they were there within a minute and a half after they received notification of the incident. Still don't understand though why the guy ran amuck for 15 minutes before there was a 911 call made.
Yep, and a "noise" came from his apartment last night which should have gotten a complaint for police to investigate there ... diverting resources away from the theater so he'd have more time.
I'm no lawyer
"Never show your hole card" "Always have something in reserve"
There is nothing that the average CHL holder could have done in this situation. The only response to this was that by those that have tactical training, as this suspect was using advanced tactical strategies to commit his crime.
The typical CHL holder does not have training to engage a suspect in the environment that was present. That being low light, 100's of innocent bystanders, tear gas or similar substance introduced into the crowd. Even someone like me with prior LEO experience, SWAT Sniper, numerous exposures to tear gas, training on how to fight through tear gas, would have been taxed to have been able to respond to this.
Remember that in most cases the best weapon you have is your eyes and hears and a cell phone.
The thing that strikes me is how the anti gunners think this could have been prevented with gun control. Trying to get those folks to understand that the only people affected by gun control laws will be law abiding citizens. The strictest laws in the world could not have prevented this act.
Their objective is to ban the sale of all guns in America (like England). If they succeed in that objective only the law abiding people will be disarmed. Why can't they understand that? I think it is because they want everyone in America to be as defenseless as they are. Then what....."your papers"!
Alan - ANYTHING I write is MY OPINION only. Certified Curmudgeon - But, my German Shepherd loves me!
NRA-Life, USN '65-'69 & '73-'79: RM1 1911's RULE!
AEA wrote:Their objective is to ban the sale of all guns in America (like England). If they succeed in that objective only the law abiding people will be disarmed. Why can't they understand that? I think it is because they want everyone in America to be as defenseless as they are. Then what....."your papers"!
Most of the most vocal and outspoken gun control advocates (Bloomberg is a fantastic example) aren't defenseless. They have the money and/or political clout to have trained bodyguards.
It is just us little people that doesn't deserve the right to defend ourselves in their mind.
JJVP wrote:One thing I have not seen or heard anywhere is the term "assault rifle". I would think that if he had used an AK-47 or AR-15, the media and all the usual suspects would be jumping all over for an "assault rifle" ban. No mention of high capacity magazines either. Strange.
I did hear the assault rifle phrase used on news coverage. It was also announced that he was carrying an AR-15, a Remington 870 shotgun and 2 glock 40 cal. It was a bit unclear and reported differently by different people but the way I understood it was that he had at least all but 1 of the glocks, which was in his car.
I heard an phrase that made me cringe from a Fed on the Fox news report. I think they said he was from Homeland Security and I thought he had the "R" (republican) in front of his name. He made a comment along the lines of "we'll need to look into why he was able to have such a large cache of weapons". That idea didn't thrill me. In the context, I understood him to be talking about why this guy was able to own "so many guns".
