True, still no one assumes that a ballistic vest will turn an assailant into a invulnerable superman. The actual point is that the odds a person has to prevail over an assailant with protective gear and a semi-automatic rifle that can shoot 60 rounds per minute with a high capacity magazine in tow is extremely low indeed. Hence the “more guns are the solution” nonsense the NRA peddles makes no sense whatsoever.
Here are some facts:
- Law enforcement shootings usually happen within a distance of 5 feet between the leo and the suspect.
- Some studies show that of 10 shots fired by the officers only 15% hit the mark.
Remember these are trained individuals at really close distances and under such stress look at the low hit rates. Can you imagine what are the odds an individual with a handgun could prevail over the assailant considering the gear and the environmental conditions (dark movie theater with gas and a crowd running around you) when you look at the statistics?
Another fact is that just because the suspect has been shot does not mean it will lead to automatic incapacitation. Suspects with life ending wounds have still been able to kill the officers that shot them before dying from those wounds.
Either we attempt to come with some sensible gun control laws or, to make the fight fair, we will have to walk around dressed in swat gear with AR-15s strapped to our backs wherever we go. If that is the “freedom” these second amendment nuts want I am not interested. Bearing arms in the constitution does not mean they can’t or should not be regulated. Even more so after this tragedy. End of story.