You are either incredibly stupid or so-brainwashed that you can't think rationally. Do you really think that "one" person sitting on the opposite side of a crowded theater, 25 to 30 yards away, with a .380, 9 mm,.40, or even the over-idolized .45 could have taken out a shooter wearing body amour in a surprise attack in near darkness, without killing or wounding innocent people? One lawfully armed person would not have stopped this unless he or she was in close proximaty to the shooter and had the training or natural skillsets to assess, analyze, and respond effectively under battle conditions. Indeed, I'm willing to bet there were concealed carry people in the theater who either panicked and ran or didn't have the skills or oppurtunity to safely take this guy down.
This is not an argument against CCW, but rather, I am attacking the all or nothing stupidity that seems to dominate these discussions. Rather than arguing absolutes (i.e., if "ONE" person had been lawfully armed), the better approach is for almost everyone to be lawfully armed and trained to react in a crisis situation (think Israel). If a person doesn't want to be armed and trained, then he or she should pay a tax, similar to the Obamacare tax for failing to buy health insurance.
My point is that you don't help our cause by being the drama queen. Not every life or death crisis can be stopped by "one" person with a CCW permit.
“Do you really think that “one” person sitting on the opposite side of a crowded theater, 25 to 30 yards away, with a .380, 9 mm,.40, or even the over-idolized .45 could have taken out a shooter wearing body amour in a surprise attack in near darkness, without killing or wounding innocent people?”
Yes.
Theater stadium seating allows a clear shot across a theater room, and the dork wasn’t wearing body armor as you think.