yes and maybe they would have been maybe they wouldn’t.
And as far as your trained experts placing shots, within how many shots should they be able to take down an attacker? It’s a trick question as I’ll bring up previous similar incidents where you won’t like the numbers of shots fired by “trained personel” trying to take such attackers down in broad day light without being ambushed or under tear gas effects.
A trained professional will take more shots…so your statitics mean nothing. And thats not what a trick question is…its a question where you think taking more shots is a bad thing when its not.
EDIT: In this scenario more shots will be taken diff scenarios require diff things
Edit: better yet let’s get straight to the point, bullshit me your reasoning as why California bank shootout doesn’t blow your theory out of the water.
:pop
Ever seen a police officer killed by an untrained civilian? I’ve seen a police officer shot once with a 22 in the upper body while wearing body armor and die.
One incident doesn’t prove that the people in the theatre wouldn’t have stood a better chance if someone had a gun of their own that used it. Could a gun owner have tried and failed? Yes Could they have succeeded? Yes. The fact that you for some reason think its impossible to overcome body armor is silly. It happens.
You give me one one example of people in body armor, I could give you dozens of examples of people wearing body armor dieing being shot with handguns dieing.