HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Video & Multimedia (Forum) » Proof: Concealed carry pe...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 08:40 PM

 

Proof: Concealed carry permit holders live in a dream world......

&feature=youtu.be

74 replies, 6654 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 74 replies Author Time Post
Reply Proof: Concealed carry permit holders live in a dream world...... (Original post)
Bennyboy Jan 2013 OP
Shrike47 Jan 2013 #1
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #5
onehandle Jan 2013 #2
Squinch Jan 2013 #3
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #6
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #4
Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2013 #7
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #8
Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2013 #19
Squinch Jan 2013 #9
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #10
Squinch Jan 2013 #11
Larrymoe Curlyshemp Jan 2013 #16
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #21
Sky Masterson Jan 2013 #35
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #38
FunkyLeprechaun Jan 2013 #48
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #49
FunkyLeprechaun Jan 2013 #50
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #56
FunkyLeprechaun Jan 2013 #57
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #58
FunkyLeprechaun Jan 2013 #63
alp227 Jan 2013 #13
baldguy Jan 2013 #68
Kablooie Jan 2013 #20
Sky Masterson Jan 2013 #34
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #39
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #46
FunkyLeprechaun Jan 2013 #47
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #59
FunkyLeprechaun Jan 2013 #62
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #64
jeff47 Jan 2013 #53
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #60
jeff47 Jan 2013 #65
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #66
baldguy Jan 2013 #67
uponit7771 Jan 2013 #12
lumberjack_jeff Jan 2013 #14
Larrymoe Curlyshemp Jan 2013 #15
rightsideout Jan 2013 #52
ancianita Jan 2013 #17
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #22
ancianita Jan 2013 #23
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #25
ancianita Jan 2013 #27
friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #29
ancianita Jan 2013 #30
friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #31
ancianita Jan 2013 #32
friendly_iconoclast Jan 2013 #33
ancianita Jan 2013 #42
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #36
ancianita Jan 2013 #43
lumberjack_jeff Jan 2013 #41
Kablooie Jan 2013 #18
ancianita Jan 2013 #24
Kablooie Jan 2013 #26
ancianita Jan 2013 #28
Robb Jan 2013 #37
L0oniX Jan 2013 #40
ancianita Jan 2013 #44
L0oniX Jan 2013 #45
geckosfeet Jan 2013 #51
Soundman Jan 2013 #54
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #74
rightsideout Jan 2013 #55
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #61
HawkeyeLibkid Jan 2013 #69
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #70
HawkeyeLibkid Jan 2013 #71
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #72
HawkeyeLibkid Jan 2013 #73

Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 08:53 PM

1. Really interesting video. Thanks for posting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrike47 (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 09:42 PM

5. The video was biased. Please see post #4. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 09:01 PM

2. Total Bullshit!

Most concealed carry permit holders would wet themselves before the 'bad guy' blew them away.

I saw No Evidence of wetting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 09:12 PM

3. That is really important. Everyone on both sides should be required to watch it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 09:44 PM

6. I have seen it many times. It is still biased.

It is amazing how many people are unable to see the blantant anti-gun bias in the video. Please see my post #4.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 09:40 PM

4. That was staged for the CCWer to fail.

The shooter was a police firearms instructor. Real world rampage shooters don't have that level of experience.

The CCWers is wearing thick gloves in class. Such gloves impede gun handling. In the real world no one wears gloves like that in class.

The students are being required to wear extra-long shirts that impede gun access. Real world CCWers dress with access to the gun in mind.

The shooter knows in advance that he will be facing an armed student. In the real world resistance from an armed citizen comes as a surprise to a shooter.

The armed student always sits in the same spot, so the police instructor knows exactly who to shoot next. In the real world the armed student could be anywhere.

That was not even a fair test. It was designed to handicap the armed student and make it impossible for him to win so that ABC could push an agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #4)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 10:06 PM

7. By all means,...let's keep the myth of the hero alive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #7)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 10:11 PM

8. So you have no rebuttal for my points about the video. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 01:32 AM

19. No need. I'm sure you would do better....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #4)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 10:17 PM

9. Except that:

the girl was hit because she stood up to shoot, not because she couldn't get at the gun or handle the gun. The shooter's knowledge of where she would be wasn't really germaine because she stood and showed herself under stress. The first boy was hit because he just sat there and didn't try to get his gun. His being hit was because of his reaction, or lack of it, and not the fact that he was wearing the shirt or the gloves.

The aspects of the test that you identify as unfair are not what got the kids shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #9)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 10:27 PM

10. And the police instructor knew who would be shooting at him,...

...and where they would be sitting. In a confrontation that is extremely valuable information.

Don't you think the shooter being a police firearms instructor gave him an edge too? How many rampage shooters have that level of proficiency?

I have a CCW and carry daily. If I were to be handicapped the same way those students were, I would lose too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #10)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 10:52 PM

11. Except that

they walk into the room, take a good number of seconds facing the teacher, facing away from the armed kid, and shooting the teacher, down. Watch the camera that must be mounted on the mask or shoulder of one of the firearms instructors. They are not facing the place where the kids are sitting until they have walked a number of feet into the room and then shot the instructor. They did not act on the fact that they knew where the kids were for a few seconds. As would likely happen in that scenario.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:51 AM

16. Please stay in Texas

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #9)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 01:53 AM

21. I've participated in a similar scenario with simunitions.

Take away the known placement of the resistance, and in most cases, the active shooter dies. Nearly. Every. Time.


This test was just as biased as the horseshit Fox News 'simulation' to show marijuana impairment for driving. They stuck the test subjects in a GODDAMN CDL SIMULATOR.

Oh yes, here, drive around a simulation in an 18 wheeler, oh you clipped that curb, you must be fucking impaired.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 06:29 AM

35. I call bullshit

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sky Masterson (Reply #35)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 10:35 AM

38. You are free to think so.

Non-LEO civilians are invited to participate in simunition drills in my county. Sometimes we play the 'bad guy' as well, so the police can practice entry drills.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:26 PM

48. I call BS

The CCW person was placed in an environment where they were distracted momentarily. This is IRL as well. Are you saying that you're always on alert for a bad guy with a gun?

EVERYONE can be easily distracted, EVERYONE can get engrossed in activities and forget about worrying about someone with a gun coming in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FunkyLeprechaun (Reply #48)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:21 PM

49. If I'm in a situation where I think I am part of a simulation

and I am armed with simunitions, or unarmed, and I think for a moment that something REAL is happening, my response is going to be very different than if I was actually armed.

But that wasn't the biggest issue with this test. The biggest issue is that the armed student is assigned seating, seating that the active shooter knows, and the armed student is the first 'bystander' shot every single time they ran the simulation. It's statistically possible for that to happen in a single, real world event, but the fact that it is part of the test protocol, shows the 'test' for what it is. An engineered, biased hit piece.

Just like the fox news stoned drivers piece.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #49)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:40 PM

50. N/S

It seems to me that you're overlooking the very part that reflects reality, the lecture itself. I'm not able to access the subtitles but it seems to me that the guy was pretty much put in an environment where he would be on alert for a shooter but he has to go through a lecture, to put on the face mask, neck mask, gloves etc plus a talk.

He becomes engrossed in this lecture and forgets about the gun. Are you telling me that you're always on alert IRL? You go grocery shopping and see people and think "boy, I'm glad I brought my gun, this person might shoot me"? I bet not, I'm sure you're thinking of shopping for the week, looking at your list. I went grocery shopping earlier and all I thought about was where the food items were and finishing up the shopping. I didn't think about whether there was a bad person at the store or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FunkyLeprechaun (Reply #50)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 04:44 PM

56. Very different mindset.

I engage as much as possible with the people around me. When I go to the store, I make eye contact with, and evaluate every person in sight. Not all of that is security related, but some part of it is always a threat assessment. It used to be just a threat assessment, but I find myself never saying 'do you have a problem?' as a challenge, but rather often saying, 'do you need help' or 'are you ok'?

It's very easy for me to ignore all people around me, if I want, grab XYZ, path to the register, hand over money, go home without acknowledging any person around me at all. I make an effort to do more than that. I make sure that eye contact comes with a smile, for instance. Sometimes that draws me into encounters that aren't super comfortable for me. Some people really do need some help, even if it's just to talk to a non-hostile stranger for a minute about whatever. Some people need more help than I can possibly offer too.

For me, there's always that undercurrent of 'does this person pose a threat to me or anyone else' the second I spot any person. Whether I am armed or unarmed. But I try very hard to go beyond that and start with just acknowledging other people's basic humanity. Acknowledging that they exist.

But that lizard brain, Boolean 'threat/no threat' thing is always back there. Voicing it's opinion. It's just a thing I've learned to accept and use for however useful it is. Probably an artifact of my upbringing; is dad a threat today or not, drunken moodiness or sober, going to get a beating today or not. It just is. Being helpful and kind at least keeps me on the path away from becoming like him.


If I were in that simulation, one of two things would have happened. 1. I correctly interpret that this is actually the simulation, and is NOT the real thing, but I would be probably seconds behind the curve in figuring that out, and that would be plenty for me to get 'shot'. OR, I would fail to correctly identify that it was the simulation, and I would either attempt to flee, or I would pick up the desk in front of me and smash the guy with the 'gun' into the wall with it. In the case that I thought the attack was real, I wouldn't have bothered with my simunition-loaded weapon.

Is that what happened to the people in that simulation? I don't know for sure. None of them voiced it in the interviews, so perhaps not. But I am suspicious.

Chalk it up to the lizard, again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #56)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 07:03 PM

57. It's impossible to think of two things at once

The people I see at the market are my fellow shoppers. I certainly don't think of them as a threat when I enter the store and when I exit the store. All I think of is my shopping and how I get home in time to watch my favorite tv show.

Are you telling me that you're on alert 24/7 when you're shopping/out eating dinner/going to movies and not intrinsically enjoying what you're doing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FunkyLeprechaun (Reply #57)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 07:22 PM

58. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive.

I can type one thing to you while having a conversation with another person in the room. There are some things I can't do more than one of at a time. But walking around, retrieving items, while 'reading' the body language of people around me, I can do simultaneously.

People are genuinely interesting to me as well. What they wear, how they carry themselves, etc. Generally, yes, I am always evaluating the people around me. I wouldn't consider it a conscious level of alertness, it just is. For instance, I don't feel any level of panic or worry, UNLESS someone deviates into some behavior I consider threatening.

It's actually a mindset some people pay a good deal of money to learn for certain jobs, like law enforcement. I've never been there, but there are some firearms training academies that teach it as well, to civilians. Gunsite would be one. Couple base their training on Cooper's 'color codes' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Cooper#Combat_Mindset.E2.80.94The_Cooper_Color_Code
Essentially, I am always in 'yellow', by that definition. It doesn't prevent me from enjoying life at all. In fact, without multiple streams of input, I go stir crazy very quickly.

A couple of my co-workers tell me I am not allowed to use myself as an example for anything social or pop culture, so... take that as you will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #58)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 05:59 AM

63. How often is the thing that you're typing

Is related to the conversation that you're having with the person? For me it's probably 95% of the time. Even if it's a debate like this or work-related, I can continue to type when the subject matter on both screen and in conversation are the same. If the thing I'm typing and the conversation I'm having are different, I usually stop typing because I can't think about two things at once.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #4)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 10:59 PM

13. Gotta be a reason why the video has 3,446 likes and 26,517 dislikes.

I remember watching this segment when it first came out back in 2010. Thinking back at it, yeah it's typical dumb corporate "news" reporting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alp227 (Reply #13)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 10:09 PM

68. It's got 26,517 dislikes b/c gun nuts & their sock puppets like voting in anonymous internet polls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 01:41 AM

20. In a real situation the student wouldn't be even as prepared as this.

If it comes out of the blue the shock would confuse you so it would be several seconds before you understand the situation, remember you have a gun, and get it out, aim and shoot. Also I doubt your average citizen or teacher is going to always have the gun and holster out in the clear in the optimum shooting position like in a cowboy movie. Also if you dont incapacitate the shooter immediately you will just draw fire upon yourself, not to mention the possibility of you accidentally shooting someone other than the bad guy.

You're right that the simulation wasn't 100% real, it's a simulation after all, but it illustrates some real world problems with citizens having guns and not even all the possible problems that would occur in a real world situation.

Expecting that citizens will instantly turn into Hollywood good guys that get the bad guys and protect the innocent if they carry guns is simply idiocy.

You NRA trolls are wasting your time on this website.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 06:26 AM

34. Many of these gunmen are wearing body armour

You can't prepare for that. I think you would be just as dead as the next guy.
Real CCWers are delusional and I don't feel safer with all of these Charles Bronson wannabes running around with more bullets than brains. I figure big gun in holster = little gun in pants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sky Masterson (Reply #34)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 10:37 AM

39. Calling bullshit.

That was reported at Sandy Hook Elementary, but wasn't true. It's been reported of the Aurora theater shooting as well, but aside from a groin and throat protector, his vest, based on the evidence made public so far, was only ballistic nylon. (rip-stop) It's just extra pockets.


The only actual active shooter I'm aware of to use a vest was the Tyler Tx. courthouse shooting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sky Masterson (Reply #34)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:22 PM

46. Mozambique drill for body armor.

Self-defense schools teach students to use it just in case the guy is wearing body armor. It is two fast shots to center mass followed by a fast shot to the head. It can be done in about 2 seconds by an average student of armed self-defense schools, by experts in less than 1.5 seconds. The trick is that you don't wait to see the effect of your initial shot but immediately follow with the second and third shots. Even if the bad guy is wearing body armor the impact of the first two rounds will stun him enough (Assuming that you are using a serious caliber gun.) for you to shift to his head for the third shot.

Further, body armor is very rare with rampage shooters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:35 PM

47. Allow me to rebut

Although the video isn't subtitled so here's what I'm assuming is happening- they train the shooters, they arm the shooters and the shooters, rightly so, assume there will be a guy coming in with a gun. This situation is called a controlled experiment, EVERYONE knows there will be a guy with a gun coming in (why else is EVERYONE dressed similarly). They wanted to test the reaction time of the people who have concealed weapons against someone who bursts in.

They do a distraction experiment (talking about putting on gloves/masks/etc) and soon, the CCW person isn't thinking about the gun to protect themselves- they are paying attention to what is being said in class. When the guy bursts in, it shows they are wholly unprepared to defend themselves because they were engrossed in the lecture and when they quickly try to shoot the guy they get shot.

I'd say this closely reflects reality. How often are you thinking about "well I have a gun right here, I'm protected" compared to "What do we need for dinner tonight?" "What movie's being shown?" etc. You will get engrossed in the activity and you will not be prepared when someone actually comes in with a gun.

If you're saying it's biased, I'd say you're talking out of your butt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FunkyLeprechaun (Reply #47)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 07:45 PM

59. You didn't rebut a single point that I made.

The heavy gloves and long shirts slowed them down. (They could do the distraction without the long shirts and gloves.)
The shooter was a highly experienced expert.
The shooter knew he would face opposition.
The shooter knew exactly who and where would be his opponent.
The shooter doesn't go after anyone else except the professor and the armed student.

A well designed experiment would have the students in normal clothes, distracted by the lecture. (Previously told to wear older clothes because of the ink in the bullet. Clothes paid for if they get hit.)
Rampage shooter is another student. Different student for each trial.
Rampage student is told to "shoot" as many students as he can.
Rampage student doesn't know there will be a defender.
Defending student is seated in a different spot each time.

None of us claim that an armed student would be able to stop a rampage shooter before the first two, maybe three, victims. We do claim that he would have a chance of stopping the shooter. It appears that you think it is better to cower and plead for mercy from the rampage shooter than to try to defend yourself with a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #59)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 05:54 AM

62. I did

And you're not realizing that this was a controlled experiment. The clothing was in the interest of health and safety since they were shooting paint bullets and it was included in the distraction experiment.

So are you telling me that you're ALWAYS prepared, you're ALWAYS thinking about it, even when you're engrossed in other activities?

As for me, I'd probably run away as far as I can to get away from the scene (this is a basic human response) and I bet you would too. If I get shot, so be it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FunkyLeprechaun (Reply #62)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 07:00 AM

64. I gave you a list of things they could have done to make it a fair test.

As for level of prepardness, I don't wear extra-long shirts or heavy gloves indoors.

Was the student ALWAYS sitting in the same spot part of the distraction too?

Was the shooter being a police expert a distraction?

You are so biased against guns that you refuse to see what is before you eyes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 04:05 PM

53. Ok, let's go with a few real life situations then

Columbine had an armed sheriff's deputy. How'd that work out?
A CCWer ran on over to the Giffords shooting. How'd that work out?
Taft High School had two armed sheriff's deputies. How'd that work out?

It's almost like more guns doesn't solve the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #53)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 08:03 PM

60. Here are some other real-life situations:

Pearl MS school shooting stopped by armed citizen 1997:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting

Appalachian School of Law shooting, 2002
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting

Golden Food Market Shooting 2009
http://blasphemes.blogspot.com/2009/07/golden-food-market-shootout-update.html

New Life Church Shooting 2007
http://www.policeone.com/active-shooter/articles/1638879

Winnemuccca, NV bar shooting, 2008
http://www.kolotv.com/home/headlines/19251374.html
Trolley Square Mall

4/24/1998 - Andrew Wurst attended a middle school dance in Edinboro, Pennsylvania intent on killing a bully but shot wildly into the crowd. He killed 1 student. James Strand lived next door. When he heard the shots he ran over with his 12 gauge shotgun and apprehended the gunman without firing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Middle_School_dance_shooting


LAC stops bar shooting in Plymouth, PA
http://citizensvoice.com/news/police-plymouth-shooter-wasn-t-provoked-1.1371854

I can easily list dozens of cases of CCWer engaging criminals (All documents by MSM) but they are for personal self-defense and do not appear to be the start of a rampage shooting. Here is one from 1/08/2012:
http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2013/jan/07/11/one-person-shot-during-robbery-ar-1303869/
CPD: Man Defending Infant Son Shoots Robber

SNIP
Detectives tell NBC4 34-year-old Kelby Smith was exiting his car with his infant son, when he was approached by an unknown male. He told police the suspect displayed a firearm and demanded money. Smith said he set sonís car carrier down and knelt to shield him from the gunman. As the suspect put the barrel to Smith's forehead, Smith handed the him a small amount of cash.

In a 911 call to police, Smith said, "He stuck a gun to my head, had my 2-month-old son with me when he did itÖ.he took $40 from me."

According to police documents, as the suspect was fleeing, he continued to point the gun back at Smith and his son. Smith, who is a carrying a concealed weapon (CCW) permit holder, pulled his firearm and shot the suspect while defending is son and himself.
SNIP
Much more at link


I can easily post dozens of such stories, of law-abiding citizens using guns to protect themselves. Obviously the story above would not have been the beginning of a mass rampage shooting of many people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #60)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 11:58 AM

65. And I can post many more where gun owners fail

The fact that gun owners utterly fail to stop crime the vast majority of the time means this is an incredibly stupid argument from your side.

"One in ten times a gun helps!" is not a formula for encouraging gun ownership.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #65)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 04:18 PM

66. Very few people are armed in public.

About 2% of the population legally carries in public.

Make sure your stories are of LEGALLY ARMED people whom the criminal bested. Also, the armed person has to actually be there, and the loaded gun readily available. An unloaded gun in a locked safe with the ammo locked in a separate room doesn't count.

Even one in ten is better than zero in ten.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 12, 2013, 09:53 PM

67. Any criticisms based on the idea of the shooter having knowledge

They're not likely to have in the "real" world is ludicrous. The scenario isn't testing how the shooter will react to an armed student. It's testing how the armed student will react to a shooter. The shooter is part of the scenario.

And you're critical of the students wearing gloves, but did you even notice that the shooter was wearing gloves also?

And you criticize the fact that the shooter was a police firearms instructor, while your fellow gun nuts have spent these past weeks saying armed professionals such as this don't have any advantages over average citizens who are armed. Which is it?

The fact is that this IS a fair test: How would an average person with an average level of experience react in an extraordinary situation. The answer is: Poorly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 10:54 PM

12. WOW!! People who think they're going to defend themselves are deluded!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:35 AM

14. This video does a disservice.

I have no doubt that the likelihood of a CCW holder to actually shoot an armed intruder are diminishingly small.

HOWEVER...

The posters pointing out how the test subjects have been set up to fail are right on the money. The disadvantages arbitrarily assigned to them make the segment worthless... worse than worthless, actually because the people who could have learned something from a better-designed experiment are exactly the ones that the segment alienated.

For starters, the instructors all were aiming ONLY at the test subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:50 AM

15. Projectile Dysfunction

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Larrymoe Curlyshemp (Reply #15)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:55 PM

52. LOL. You just reminded me of my Conservative Grandmother who lived in Southern California

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 01:18 AM

17. Anyone who doesn't know when a shooter will show up is set up to fail. Period. That's life.

Initiating shooters start off in control and, as "first off the post," usually stay that way for awhile. I think the video is spot on about even TRAINED shooters not getting accurate shots off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #17)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 01:58 AM

22. I don't suppose you noticed that

every single time, the only two people shot are the 'instructor' at the front of the class, and the 'armed' student.

Every time.

This is not a useful scenario.

Nor does the student know this is a test at all. But the student DOES know the gun on his or her hip is loaded with simunitions. That can play a part in reaction time as well, if there is some apprehension this was a real shooting, rather than a simulation.


There are protocols for running this sort of simulation, that were not used here. At best, this shows that it is difficult to get off a shot if you are the first bystander targeted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #22)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:09 AM

23. That said, this video can also be said to fairly approximate defense success irl.

You're right about the positioning of the shot student. Perhaps another designated in another position in the room could drop the shooter, but at the least, the initial damage would still be done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #23)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:14 AM

25. Sure, I totally agree.

One thing advocates for Concealed Carry often overlook, is that the initial damage will be done, regardless. You'd be pretty hard pressed to draw and fire fast enough to save the professor in that room, even if you saw the gun through the door, approaching. It just can't realistically be done.

Giffords had a CPL. No one has said definitively, but she may have been carrying the day Loughner shot her. No avail, because the announcement of hostilities was the shot that hit her in the head. No one could do a damn thing to prevent that initial damage, no matter how many armed people may or may not have been nearby.

That's cold reality, and pro-CPL folks (like myself) need to keep that in mind. This is not a solution to violent attacks. It's a stop-gap. It's plugging the wound. To prevent the initial attack, we need to do other things as well. Policy things, on the acquisition and transfer of firearms, for starters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #25)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:59 AM

27. One Big Policy Change that I'm for is that CCW be vastly more limited than it now is.

But yes, at the point of purchase, for sure. Transfer paperwork can be handled through the Department of Motor Vehicles and Firearms, which could be set up using all fifty states current record keeping systems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #27)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:36 AM

29. Why? CCW holders are general not the problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #29)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:37 AM

30. Then which gun owners are? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #30)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:38 AM

31. Criminals. Work on stopping them..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #31)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:44 AM

32. Not all CCW are criminals, but all criminals conceal their weapons to their intended advantage. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #32)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:46 AM

33. And most of them can't *get* a permit. So what's your point?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #33)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:00 PM

42. Working on the criminal element means that if they can see open carriers around, they're less

likely to engage in quick, easy crimes of opportunity. A lot of personal crime is simple street mugging by two or more criminals using guns, working in tandem, spreading across large swaths of various neighborhoods.

Conceal carry response time usually doesn't prevent any of this. Open carry probably would. That's my point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #32)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 06:30 AM

36. And criminals carry illegally.

Are you proposing to make it double illegal for a criminal to carry? It already is double illegal as it is illegal for him to even have a gun. So do you make it triple illegal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #36)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:04 PM

43. Why not. There's a compelling public interest in maintaining public safety. There's no talking

misdemeanor criminality here; the concealed criminal's life threatening criminality merits charges of more than "registration" or hooliganism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #17)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:52 AM

41. Every shooter who has knowledge of which individual in the room is armed is set up to succeed. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 01:20 AM

18. Just what I was wondering about today.

I was wondering how effective your average person with a gun would be in a shocking, stressful shooting like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kablooie (Reply #18)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:10 AM

24. According to the video, not very. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #24)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 02:53 AM

26. If every single person was armed one might get lucky and shoot the assailant.

I guess that's what the NRA is pushing for.
Arm every person in the country over the age of 6 and we'll all be safe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kablooie (Reply #26)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:09 AM

28. I think I want to post a thread connected to this idea of safety with guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 08:50 AM

37. A month or two without training and you're back to square one.

Sounds about right. K&R.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 11:04 AM

40. Msg to all DU members who have a CCP ...leave DU.

DU has become a platform for anti gun. I came here for news not a group agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #40)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:09 PM

44. How to deal with gun access and use IS the news lately. The only group agenda, as I see it, is

to reach a broader public understanding about who/what secures or endangers our freedoms -- those of life, liberty and property in general compatibility with the right to bear arms.


Are you a CCP? Could you explain why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #44)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 12:12 PM

45. Here's the real GUN NUT in the room...



You're all welcome to become rational about guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 03:43 PM

51. Yeah. I believe everything I see on the intertubes too.

I want to believe

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 04:13 PM

54. Here is some more proof!

 

I have always though this video shows the reality of what can and has happened in real life. I wonder which ccph would have been the one to take these guys down, lol. Well it truly isn't funny, but the fantasy world these sorts live in just leaves you wondering. http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=tsOWSDtxERU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DtsOWSDtxERU

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Soundman (Reply #54)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:05 AM

74. The North Hollywood shoot-out proves nothing about CCW.

Those guys were dressed head-to-toe in body armor, and armed with full-auto AK-47s. That has not happened since then.

We who have CCWs do NOT claim to be able to handle ALL POSSIBLE situations, so you can put your strawman back into the barn.

We do claim that being armed will give us a chance in most ordinary situations. Some chance is better than no chance.

I can easily post dozens of MSM stories of CCWers who have successfully engaged ordinary armed criminals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bennyboy (Original post)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 04:15 PM

55. CCW people are going to hate me

But I think they are living in a world of fear and paranoia which isn't Freedom. They are a prisoner of Fear.

Then there is the macho image. Swaggering around like you're hot stuff packing heat.

I've been held up at knife point and didn't run out and get a gun afterwards. If I had a gun the assailants probably would have turned it on me or stole it. Or I would have been stabbed fidgeting around for it. Real life is not like the movies.

If you try to be the hero you'll probably end up catching one between the eyes before you can react in time. I'm not sure why people want to swagger around packing heat like it was in the days of the Wild West. I hope we've progressed further than that by now.

I'm not totally anti-gun. I've fired Beretta's at our local range and skeet shoot and go to the range with my son's scout troop, recently in December. But I don't keep guns at our house and I can live without them. The military and police should be the ones carrying them. Citizen Rambo carrying them is just an accident waiting to happen. I don't want their second hand gun smoke and bullets flying, or more like ricocheting, in my direction. I don't care how much training they've had. And they should seek help for their paranoia problem. Many of them will take their own lives with their guns since more people die from suicide by gun than from other gun deaths. Guns provide an easy impulsive excuse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rightsideout (Reply #55)

Fri Jan 11, 2013, 08:25 PM

61. Definately a gun is not for you.

I don't want their second hand gun smoke and bullets flying, or more like ricocheting, in my direction.
Please show where this has happened in real life. I can easily post dozens of MSM news articles of real world CCWers who have defended themselves from armed criminals. I am aware of only one case of a CCWer missing and hitting the wrong person.

I'm not sure why people want to swagger around packing heat like it was in the days of the Wild West.
We don't swagger. All CCW classes teach awarness & avoidance first, engagement as a last resort.

You were held at knifepoint because you failed to spot trouble coming. Maybe the situation didn't allow it, or maybe you weren't alert. There are numerous training books and videos on how to spot and avoid dangerous situations. None of them are macho-looking-for-a-fight type.

I know numerous people who have CCWs and NONE of them swagger, looking for trouble. Such people are rarely able to get a CCW as the attitude of looking for trouble will have gotten them in trouble with the law fairly early and they will not pass the screening.

According to the FBI there are over 10 million violent and/or property crimes every year in the U.S. It isn't paranoia to be prepared.

If you want to be helpless, that is your right. I respect your right, but not your choice. Please don't use misinformation to try to push your choice onto me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #61)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 01:46 AM

69. Wow...

Blame the victim, that's always the best solution.

So now we need to be aware, spot trouble coming, be trained police officers pretty much?

For what it's worth, my father was on our city council for 8 years or so, and participated in simulations like this in the past with the local PD. It was a citizens course. In the "gun" simulation everything ended pretty much like this one did. Only in once instance did a CCW permit holder in the simulation even get a shot off. Mind you, these were large groups.

I guess if you're killed at a school shooting, you should have known it was coming, I get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HawkeyeLibkid (Reply #69)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:54 PM

70. Just be observant of your surroundings.

You posted about being held by a robber at knife point. That is NOT the same as a rampage shooting. Make up your mind, are you going to talk about a knife robbery or a school shooting?

I can fairly well guess some of the elements of your having been robbed. You were highly unlikely to have been in a crowd. Robbers don't like crowds for their work.

You were likely in a fringe area. That is a place where people are leaving a crowd to go their ways, such as from a store to a parking lot.

He likely tried to start a conversation with you as he approached you, until he was close enough.

You don't have to be a trained police officer, just know a few basics.

It is a sad fact that many victims participate in their own victimization. You should be able to flash wads of cash in bars in bad parts of town, to be able to leave your doors unlocked, and walk around blissfully unaware of what is happening - but none of those things are wise. Criminals don't strike at random. The select their targets, and one of the things, among other things, they look for is a person who doesn't know what is happening.

Criminology is a well studied discipline. You may wish to do some reading in the field and learn how the other side thinks and works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #70)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 11:48 PM

71. No, your projecting

that if you are unaware, you had it coming. Not everyone is Rambo and not everyone is a CIA Agent. You're getting a little paranoid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HawkeyeLibkid (Reply #71)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 12:39 PM

72. You are the first person responsible for your safety. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #72)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 02:38 PM

73. Once again

projecting. I get it, we all get it. If you're not a trained agent, paranoid out in the public, it is your fault.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread