Seriously, try applying a little bit of common sense here. If someone has an automatic weapon and is currently firing it, are you going to try to bum rush him?
Or are you going to increase your chances of not getting shot a dozen times by NOT charging right at the crazed gunman?
First I heard of that. Citation please.
good point.
Narrow isles in a movie theater, he could have been tackled from behind. I like to think I would have tried. Never really been a scenario like that though, who knows
good post...I was thinking the same the same thing! After a while, there were hundreds of people behind him, right? All it took was one guy in the bunch of people nearby to jump on his back and choke him out in 10 seconds....or snap his neck.
Mr. Impatient said in relevant part:
“If someone has an automatic weapon and is currently firing it”
Calling this liberal lie out. Nothing I have seen indicated he had anything other then a semi automatic. If you got something to back up he had an automatic weapon I would like to see it.
The rifle he used was a “semi-automatic”...one trigger pull=one shot fired.
Infantry doctrine has it that when you are INSIDE the killzone in an ambush you do an armed frontal assault but when you are OUTSIDE the killzone you withdraw and/or seek cover as appropriate.
If all the people closest to the shooter were children you'd probably need to wait until he'd gotten them out of your path ~ and even then running inside a threater over the seats is probably somewhat difficult.
Basically, the reason he got away with this is that he had a gas mask, he knew what he was doing, he had on body armor and a helmet, the terrain was very difficult, and nobody else was properly armed.
A person or persons could take him down by rushing him from behind.