Media Quiet About San Antonio Theater Shooting

[Brainiac]

On Sunday December 17, 2012, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant!

Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting?

There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened.

Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week. Just thought you’d like to know.

Agenda revealed! If you had any doubts that the media was pushing for this and who their masters were, doubt no longer. This is spooky. Alot of what you read in the ‘conspiracy world’ is bull but there IS alot of truth too.. You just have to sort out the facts yourself. -Mort

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative...g-2524596.html

[KChiefer]

A) The off-duty officer wasn't some random ccw person, she was actually working security at the complex.

B) Uniformed Police were already on scene.

C) The gunmen was essentially committing a crime of passion. He went after specific people with seemingly little planning, a hand gun, and likely far less ammo and armor than recent mass shootings.

The headline you want from the media?

"Jilted Lover Shoots Girlfriend And One Other Before Being Shot By Police"

Riveting.

Now, in your world where there should be multiple ccw's in movie theaters, what happens when the police enter the theater and there's 5-6 random people exchanging fire???

[RNR]

Originally Posted by Aries Walker

Well, there's a difference between firearms safety training, and crisis management training. It sounds like, assuming the academy teaches crisis management, that you have those covered, but I would wager that most people who have a concealed carry permit have not been through the state police academy.

As for the military, you tell me. Did basic training include any instruction in civilian crisis intervention? Did you have any training or preparation having to do with panicking crowds, maintaining communication, minimizing damage, security procedures, and so on? Or was it basically the first half of Full Metal Jacket?

She's a police woman. She has received that training, especially after 14 or however many years she's been on the force. She could (and, I'll bet, did) just yell out "Police!" and she and the other cop formed a team and took him down.


I'm just saying Texas has a much more enthusiastic gun culture than, say, Connecticut, where 20-year-old Lanza wasn't old enough to legally own a handgun.

So you are saying that soldiers many who have been in fire fights are not trained enough to carry a gun? Training that makes them very familiar with their weapons and the reaction training of identifying friendly or enemy in crisis situations

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by Aries Walker

Well, there's a difference between firearms safety training, and crisis management training. It sounds like, assuming the academy teaches crisis management, that you have those covered, but I would wager that most people who have a concealed carry permit have not been through the state police academy.

As for the military, you tell me. Did basic training include any instruction in civilian crisis intervention? Did you have any training or preparation having to do with panicking crowds, maintaining communication, minimizing damage, security procedures, and so on? Or was it basically the first half of Full Metal Jacket?

She's a police woman. She has received that training, especially after 14 or however many years she's been on the force. She could (and, I'll bet, did) just yell out "Police!" and she and the other cop formed a team and took him down.

All of these are extremely valid points. I have been pushing for all of this to be a part of CCW/CHL training/certification. I do NOT think owning a gun should require any of this... but carrying it in most public places should. Of course the trade off I would demand in return would be an almost complete elimination of the so called "gun free" zones.

[RNR]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

A) The off-duty officer wasn't some random ccw person, she was actually working security at the complex.

B) Uniformed Police were already on scene.

C) The gunmen was essentially committing a crime of passion. He went after specific people with seemingly little planning, a hand gun, and likely far less ammo and armor than recent mass shootings.

The headline you want from the media?

"Jilted Lover Shoots Girlfriend And One Other Before Being Shot By Police"

Riveting.

Now, in your world where there should be multiple ccw's in movie theaters, what happens when the police enter the theater and there's 5-6 random people exchanging fire???

And your headline is "Criminal shoots people, time to take law abiding citizens guns away"

[KChiefer]

How about the recent Firefighter shooting in NY that has barely been covered?

Hey look! Another nut with a bushmaster planning an attack and executing it with ease!

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

And your headline is "Criminal shoots people, time to take law abiding citizens guns away"

False. I've never said we should ban all firearms. Ever.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

So you are saying that soldiers many who have been in fire fights are not trained enough to carry a gun? Training that makes them very familiar with their weapons and the reaction training of identifying friendly or enemy in crisis situations

I doubt that is what he is saying. Modern military training certainly covers most of what is required but it certainly isn't 100% for situations like this. There is more to be prepared for than just knowing how to handle a gun and avoid friendly casualties.

In my perfect world, someone with a military background could take "fast track" training that fills in those gaps and get their CCW/CHL. Combine this with an elimination of most gun free zones and you'd have a very effective emergency response solution. (assuming a good percentage of people opt in to do this and carry)

[rockymtnchief]

Your arguments are still dumb. (Sorry, was trying to use a nicer word)

Would you rather:
(A) Be in a crowded theater with a gunman shooting everyone.

(B) Be in a crowded theater with a gunman shooting everyone and an armed civilian firing back to try and save lives?

All of these gunman have a plan in their minds. When their plans are interupted, they panic and flee. They're cowards. No different than a bully getting knocked in the nose by some kid they're picking. They done rather quickly.

[RNR]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

False. I've never said we should ban firearms. Ever.

So we agree that there should be no new laws imposed on law abiding gun owners

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

So we agree that there should be no new laws imposed on law abiding gun owners

I agree with you there... I would however like to see a complete restructure of the gun carry laws. More comprehensive training and fewer (if not ZERO) gun free zones.

Putting more qualified competent armed citizens in more places.

[AustinChief]

Just to be clear. I want these changes to occur on a state or even local level. Absolutely no way I want the federal government involved.

[KChiefer]

How about this beauty?


Report: Federal Agent May Have Been Fatally Shot by Friendly Fire at N.Y. Pharmacy

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/01/02...t-ny-pharmacy/

Now the agent was shot by police, but my point remains, friendly fire happens. I assume you guys have now problem charging a ccw with manslaughter when they hit a bystander, yes?

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

So we agree that there should be no new laws imposed on law abiding gun owners

False. Well, the whole thing is if your a gun owner now, there's little the government can/should do to impede your rights to own a gun. Things we should do is
A) Make it more difficult for nuts to obtain guns
B) Begin a stricter registry of guns so they can be traced(I know, "that's so the gov can take them!" No, the shit will have hit the fan far before they ever accomplish that.)
C) Stop producing military grade weaponry for the general public. And on this, screw it, own a tank if you like, but I'd hope they turn your asshole inside-out before you're allowed to.

[rockymtnchief]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

I agree with you there... I would however like to see a complete restructure of the gun carry laws. More comprehensive training and fewer (if not ZERO) gun free zones.

Putting more qualified competent armed citizens in more places.

Agreed.

I know in the county I was issued my CCW, a valid reason was not enough to get a CCW. You had to have some formal training.

I'm not sure it's that way in all states.

[RNR]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

I doubt that is what he is saying. Modern military training certainly covers most of what is required but it certainly isn't 100% for situations like this. There is more to be prepared for than just knowing how to handle a gun and avoid friendly casualties.

In my perfect world, someone with a military background could take "fast track" training that fills in those gaps and get their CCW/CHL. Combine this with an elimination of most gun free zones and you'd have a very effective emergency response solution. (assuming a good percentage of people opt in to do this and carry)

He made a cute remark about Full Metal Jacket. It clear shows he does not have a ****ing clue the type of combat our troops are engaged in or the type of training they go through. Door to door training where innocents and bad guys are mixed together is a very large part of their training. There is nobody more prepared to be in a crisis situation than the troops that receive this training and in many cases real life situation experience~