Thursday, August 09, 2012

When Guns Stopped A Massacre

Tails of the Gun  

When Guns Stopped A Massacre


Res Ipsa Loquitor

On February 12, 2007, a lone gunman, Sulejman Talovic opened fire at the crowded Trolley Square shopping mall killing five bystanders. Armed with a shotgun with a pistol grip, a 38-caliber handgun with rubber grips, and a backpack full of ammunition, he set forth on his rampage through the Mall.

But he did not get as far as he had hoped.

He was stopped when off-duty police officer Kenneth Hammond of the Ogden City Police Department who was at Trolley Square having an early Valentine’s Day dinner with his pregnant wife. When they heard shots, she called 911 and he drew his weapon and confronted Talovic. He was joined by Sgt. Andrew Oblad of the Salt Lake City Police Department. They pinned down Talovic, stopping further deaths, until a SWAT team from the Salt Lake City Police Department killed him.

Hammond, a man with a weapon, was credited with saving “countless lives.”

In Aurora, Colorado, there were no armed bystanders and Holmes was unimpeded in his deadly rampage. Gun control advocates use the grizzly story of the Aurora movie theater to push their cause. But common sense tells us that it is easier to put guns into the hands of law-abiding citizens and to instruct them in their use than to keep them away from the insane or evil people who perpetrate these shootings.


If the movie-goers in Aurora had one or two armed and trained men or women, the shooting would have gone the way of the Trolley Square massacre, not the bloodier outcome in Aurora. [
When Guns Stopped A Massacre]

Nothing I can add to this  boss.
cuzzin ricky

28 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is another one that hurts the brain. The Colorado shooting is a textbook example of gun control. The sheeple, obeying the law, were unarmed. THAT IS WHAT GUN CONTROL IS!
Tim

Jess said...

My favorite: "When seconds count, the police are minutes away."

I-RIGHT-I said...

"If the movie-goers in Aurora had one or two armed and trained men or women, the shooting would have gone the way of the Trolley Square massacre"

Nonsense but, it's a nice thought.

Anonymous said...

The movie theater was a "gun free zone". Boycott any business that makes you disarm.

Freddie Sykes

rickn8or said...

Freddie, not only was the theater a Gun-Free Zone per corporate policy, the city of Aurora banned carry, even for people with a Colorado carry permit.

But I believe [name redacted] would have been gone with the first round of return fire.

As it was, he owned that theater. He shot people until he got tired of it, then surrendered to the first armed person he saw.

But yeah. If my handgun isn't welcome in your business, more than likely my money won't be either.

Anonymous said...

Israelies have experienced many Trolly Square type incidents. There was one when I was there in'94 when an Arab opened fire on a crouded street in Jerusalem. Fortunately, they do not have our idiotic gunlaws there,and several Jews blew him away within seconds.
These are the people with far and away the most experience with these matters. We would be wise to emulate them. Oddly enough, the carrying of sidearms does not seem to be a Right-Left issue there.
PUNTSIMY

Anonymous said...

MAKE THAT 'CROWDED'
PUNTSIMY

Anonymous said...

An armed citizen Chad Eastep confronted a rampaging killer with his drawn G-23. the Murderer turned his own gun on himself at that point. The 73 year old felon had killed a waitress and severally wounded the manager of a Ridpath hotel restaurant, in Spokan, WA 1995 the felon had a gym bag for of guns speed loaders and ammunition. Not a word in the news. Chad stopped a massacre.
RAK There are many more like this the lamestream media suppresses the fact that armed citizens stop the killing every time they intervene.

Kristophr said...

Bullshit, I-RIGHT-I.

Any opposition causes an active killer to derail. With two exceptions ( the Texas Clocktower shooeter, and the North Hollywood robbery ), they shut down, and either hide or kill themselves.

The active killer at that Sikh temple was exiting the building because some of his victims managed to carve him up with Kirpans before they died.

When McKown tried to stop the Tacoma Mall killer ( and got shot in the spine in the process ), the killer hid in a shop afterwards, and spent the next half hour doing an Emo whine to a terrified clerk about how rough his life was, until SWAT showed and arrested him.

ANY opposition can shut down an active killer.

Any opposition means, at worst, that the active killer is busy dealing with being violenced rather than methodically executing victims.

I-RIGHT-I said...

"ANY opposition can shut down an active killer."

Good to know. You're elected, here's a 9mm. Not big enough? Here's a .45.

Now stand there and shoot at him while I get away. Don't forget the only shot you have is in the smoky dark with panic all around you and your target is the man's eyes because everything else is armored. Thank you for your service to mankind. We will remember you fondly.

BobG said...

Trolley Square was also a "no gun" area (sign is posted by the doors), which is why I don't frequent it.

Kristophr said...

I-RIGHT-I:

If an active killer begins a murder spree within earshot of me, I will grab what I have, and march to the sound of the guns.

I could not live with myself for doing less. And yes, It may very well cost me.

So take your sarcasm and cowardice elsewhere please.

pdwalker said...

I-right-I,

Being yellow is nothing to be proud or boastful of.

pdwalker said...

This just in:

Armed Citizen in TX Stops Shooting Spree and Saves Cop by Making 150+ Yard Shot With a Pistol

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=144583

If only this had been a gun free zone, this tragedy would not have happened.

leelu said...

Gang, I-Right-I has a point - remember, the Aurora shooter had popped tear gas. That coupled with the noise from the film, and no doubt screams of the patrons, and the fact that the theater would have been dark, make 'distracting' the shooter problematic at best.

If you've had tactical training in those conditions, I'll gladly say you'd stand a chance. If not, not. Its not cowardice, its just common sense.

It isn't about courage, or the lack thereof. First rule of first response is, don't become part of the problem.

Anonymous said...

Don't be too hard on Righty. Like many of us, he often finds it hard to back off a bad position. Besides, he's from Texas, and probably has a tumor.

Casca

Anonymous said...

Read More Guns, Less Crime empirical data showing that when Red Blooded Americans stand up and shoot back, bad guys die and the overall carnage is less.
I could not imagine going through life as a craven coward that would chose to slink away, while innocents were in peril.
Get Trained, Go Armed.
My motto as a firearms trainer and civil rights activist.
Guns Save Lives.
Alan Korwin's motto from years of research he is the author of the state by state gun laws books. Gunlaws.com
RAK

Anonymous said...

He popped smoke Big F'n deal... even tear gas; so what???!! It makes you tear up and choke one can still function if a person chooses to do so. Stand and fight like a Real American or slink away like a coward. "Oh, it's dark"- that why we invented flashlights ...ever heard of Surefire? Get you shit together. Oh he was (Not) wearing body armor" we deal with that with groin and head shots. Be prepared, get trained go armed, not just words, it's the only way to go through life as a responsible adult. One can always think of excuses for failure. It takes a modicum of intestinal fortitude and desire to do right to stand up to violence.
RAK

Chris in NC said...

I-RIGHT-I said: "Don't forget the only shot you have is in the smoky dark with panic all around you and your target is the man's eyes because everything else is armored"


Yes, because we all know that kevlar is a magical force field that stops the bullets 2 inches from the person wearing it. What horseshit. Even armored shooters can be impeded with a shot to dead center mass. A bullet to the chest would not have killed the shooter, no, but it would have stunned the hell out of him. Kevlar does not allow the bullet to enter the body, but it sure as hell allows it to break bones on impact. A couple shots to the chest and mr shooter is now focusing completely on pain with breathing problems as his cracked ribs are screaming. At that point, you get your head shot when he is buckled over.

Anonymous said...

He had a tacticle vest, not body armor. So I am late to this discussion, And I think, what would I do? Police are trained to shoot with spray in their eyes. It can be done. After all of the shooting starts there will be 4 classes of people, The shooter, the runner, the dirt eater and the Non Victim. After a few seconds, the shooter gets most of the runners and they are now dirt napping. In the theater, most would be trying to take cover and eating dirt the Non Vics are laying in wait, letting people hit the dirt in one way or the other. At this point you can now safely return fire if you are laying on your back shooting up into the wall. (at 2:04 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLAzry7IEd4) with out fear of hitting any runner. If you are up in the stadium seating you can shoot down on the the shooter because anyone next to him is dead anyway. This is how the scenario played out in my mind. His legs are unprotected and even if I hit him repeatedly with a nine mil, it still feels like he was hit in the chest with a sledge hammer. There are a couple of places that teach weapon manipulation. I recommend for the beginner, Appleseed. http://appleseedusa.org/ Free for women, kids, vets and 70 bucks for for men, plus range fees. They are ALL over, A 2 day clinic that teaches marksmanship. Anyone that is not used to guns will love the Appleseed shoots. Then to move to more advanced I recommend Magpul Dynamics "Art of..." series. Impeccable. There are plenty of other classes that can teach you some are in the thousands. Appleseed is a good value. The cheapest way is simply talk to your friend that is a cop, they will be more than happy to help.

molonlabe28 said...

I agree with Kristopher.

Where is George Patton when a coward needs to be bitch-slapped?

Those who choose to not carry weapons have also chosen to live at the bottom of the food chain.

They will be eaten first.

leelu said...

Wow. RAK and molonlabe28 are obviously bad asses. You two... have you actually been in a similar situation, or trained for one??

I don't know you guys, and I appreciate you suggestions for training. But your comments here have devolved into name calling and are flirting w/ blowhard-ness. It tends to cast doubt on your claims...

Kristophr said...

leelu: I've seen the elephant on more than a few occasions.

If I-RIGHT-I is a cop, I'll give him a pass ... this kind of INSTITUTIONAL cowardice is set by administrators who are risk-averse about their personal careers.

When someone ignores the perimeter/SWAT doctrine, the death toll goes way down ... but often someone pays a high price for this.

molonlabe28 said...

Leelu-

To answer your questions, yes and yes.

BTW, I was referring to I Right I and not to you. While I would have done differently from what you described in your post, you were polite and respectful.

I Right I was niether.

From what I read, 2 or 3 men/boys died trying to shield their female companions at the Aurora movie theater.

I suspect that they would have rather had a gun to at least have had a fighting chance. I certainly would have wanted one.

I do a good bit of firearms safety training to new shooters and I stress safety and judgment, not bravado and guts.

I live in a city with an extremely high murder rate, so I would never dream of leaving the house without a gun on me. A couple of weeks ago, 2 people were murdered in a home invasion around 12 - 15 houses from my mother's house (where I grew up). In that neighborhood, we have had 4 murders (that I can think of), many aggravated assaults, robberies and burglaries, and a very high profile kidnapping - all within a few blocks of my parents' house.

This is my reality, and I choose to carry a concealed gun to protect myself and my family.

Most people don't carry (at least legally), and that is their choice - not mine.

molonlabe28 said...

Leelu-

To answer your questions, yes and yes.

BTW, I was referring to I Right I and not to you.

From what I read, 2 or 3 men/boys died trying to shield their female companions at the Aurora movie theater.

I suspect that they would have rather had a gun to at least have had a fighting chance. I certainly would have wanted one.

I do a good bit of firearms safety training to new shooters and I stress safety and judgment, not bravado and guts.

I live in a city with an extremely high murder rate, so I would never dream of leaving the house without a gun on me. A couple of weeks ago, 2 people were murdered in a home invasion around 12 - 15 houses from my mother's house (where I grew up). In that neighborhood, we have had 4 murders (that I can think of), many aggravated assaults, robberies and burglaries, and a very high profile kidnapping - all within a few blocks of my parents' house.

This is my reality and I choose to carry a concealed gun to protect myself and my family.

Most people don't carry (at least legally), and that is their choice - not mine.

pdwalker said...

Leelu,

A slightly different perspective,

Yes, I have trained under the effects of gas and smoke, yes I've had some training for shitty situations, but no, I've never been in that situation. For all I know, I'd drop to the floor, piss my pants and wail for mommy. I don't know.

But here is what I do know - I know what I want to do, and if I had the tools to defend myself that's what I'd prefer to use. I'd hope my training would allow me to do what is necessary rather than running for the exit as another target.

If my mindset were to be to turn my back and run for the exit, then there is almost no chance I'd be mentally capable of defending myself. Rationalizing that cowardice as "I'm going to save my life at the expense of some other hero" is just going to make me an extra target.

The other problem I'd have is living with myself afterwards when I could have done something.

No matter how you rationalize it, it's morally the wrong thing to do.

I-RIGHT-I said...

Will 'ya look at that? All the name calling! Sarcasm mixed with common sense a little too much for you guys? I'll keep that in mind. But one thing is for sure, we've got a bunch of damned heroes around here and I'm damned proud to just to say hello from time to time.

leelu said...

Thank you, gentlemen!!

Post a Comment

Just type your name and post as anonymous if you don't have a Blogger profile.