Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

So who do you shoot at?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
Cyrano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 11:31 AM
Original message
So who do you shoot at?
Edited on Sun Feb-13-11 11:32 AM by Cyrano
When Congresswoman Gabby Giffords was shot in Arizona, there were people in the crowd who were packing.

Which brings up an interesting dilemma. Assume you're in a crowd and armed, someone gets shot, you don't see the shooter, and a few people draw their weapons. Who do you shoot at? Even if you're an off-duty law enforcement officer and see someone holding a gun at the scene of a shooting, who do you shoot at?

Guns are as American as apple pie and will probably be around as long as we have apple pie. So if you're trained in the use of firearms and are present at a scene of insanity where shooting is taking place(Columbine, a political assassination, and so many other instances), who do you shoot at?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
1. I'm thinking everyone who looks dangerous ... which is everybody. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. ROFL
Edited on Sun Feb-13-11 12:21 PM by liberal N proud
:rofl:



:sarcasm:

:sarcasm:

:sarcasm:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quinnox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
2. If I was a sniper then I think you have to get permission before
taking someone out. At least that is what I read about one case of a crazed shooter who was in a fast food restaurant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneTenthofOnePercent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
3. You don't even draw your weapon until you *know* your target and what is behind it.
Edited on Sun Feb-13-11 11:54 AM by OneTenthofOnePercent
Even drawing the weapon is scrutinized by the law - a threat of deadly force.
If proper training and execution is used by all... then no one draws their firearm until they see THE shooter.
Not to mention that you definitely don't want to be running around carrying a gun when the police arrive.
Police misidentify and engage the wrong target more frequently than civilian carriers.
(the good news is that police are less accurate though - so maybe they'll miss :))

In fact, the one civilian who responded to the Tucson shooting found the shooter *after* bystanders rushed Loughner. The guy with the CCW saw a bystander who had confiscated Loughner's gun and because the guy with the concealed gun could not determine if that guy was actually the shooter his concealed weapon never left his holster. The guy handled the situation pretty well. Luckily for him, other bystanders got there before he did and he was not forced to shoot at anybody.

This is generally what happens in the real world. States have been allowing concealed carry for many years and a majority of states allow it... rest assured, what you address in the OP simply doesn't happen with any frequency if at all. ;)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
safeinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. If you are a cop, a black wallet in
the hands of a Black person is reason enough. Thanks to Michael Moore you can trade in that black wallet for a green or pink one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJwI66ifjPc
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hangingon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #3
20. Very sensible response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NOLALady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
4. That's easy.
You shoot at the scary looking person who does not look like a "real" Merican. You betcha!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
east texas lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. With that line of reasoning you would immediately be denied a carry permit...
Edited on Sun Feb-13-11 12:08 PM by east texas lib
Force is the last option, not the first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. With that line of reasoning, you can be elected sheriff in many parts of the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
east texas lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. If that was true, you'd be in a heap-o-trouble...
}(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. Are you implying "real Americans" don't support rational gun control laws?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
east texas lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. Nope...
I'm saying that anyone who was foolish enough to advocate using deadly force based on "scary looks" or assuming because of those looks that someone is not a "real Merican" would be denied a carry permit if they were foolish to make those statements to the issuing authority. And once again, force is always the last resort, never the first. Why imply it when you can simply say it? But I did enjoy zinging you. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
36. Yes with his line of reasoning
East Texas lib would be elected sheriff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #4
35. What's a Merican
Really?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virginia mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
5. I carry a gun....everyday...
practically everywhere I go...Legaly with a CCW permit..

For me, I would ONLY draw my gun in defense of myself, or loved ones.. and ONLY then in the face of a potentially deadly threat, IE, a attack by multiple assailants, or a single person with ANY weapon. In other words, my sidearm is not negotiating tool, it is the LAST RESORT.

In a group situation, it gets MUCH dicier. for example, if VIRGINIA laws applied in the Gifford's shooting.. Odds are I would NOT have drawn a weapon, UNTIL I WAS ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN I HAD AN ACTIVE SHOOTER, AND HE WAS ACTING IN PLAIN SIGHT. Sadly this will probably be after he has shot some innocent people.

I am not a police officer, I don't have the authority or the training to tell anyone to "Freeze!!" or to "Drop it!" Someone could see me with my drawn weapon and shoot me!!! He already has his gun out and is actively shooting people..I need to draw mine. When I do, it will be to shoot to kill, their will be no warning... and once he is down, and "out of the fight" I will re-holster, and wait for the police to arrive, to do their reports.

Let me reiterate..

A: I must WITNESS him shooting innocent people...

B: If I draw, I must aim true, and shoot to kill...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneTenthofOnePercent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. As a someone who carries a gun in virgina... doesn't the shooter have to directly threaten you?
I though VA does not even have Castle Doctrine?
So if you shoot somebody, and you sought them out, you could be in serious doo doo.

At any rate, I agree with your conclusion. As a civilian carrying, if you draw your gun to shoot a KNOWN target you must be shooting center of mass to kill. It's kind of hard to claim self defense with a calculated offensive move like purposefully shooting only to disable him. Police have the legal latitude to act offensively.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #6
27. I am fairly sure that in any state, you may shoot to defend a third party.
You may still have to justify it afterwards, but I know of no place where it is illegal to do so.

And no, you don't shoot to kill, you shoot to stop. There is a profound legal difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
one-eyed fat man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #27
39. Burden of proof is different in some states.
In Kentucky when shooting to defend a third party you may only do so if the person your are defending would be justified in shooting in self defense and that is the case in fact. This is a higher standard than if defending yourself where you can react to a situation as it appears to be.

503.070 Protection of another.
(1) The use of physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable when:

(a) The defendant believes that such force is necessary to protect a third person against the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by the other person; and

(b) Under the circumstances as the defendant believes them to be, the person whom he seeks to protect would himself have been justified under KRS 503.050 and 503.060 in using such protection.

(2) The use of deadly physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable when:

(a) The defendant believes that such force is necessary to protect a third person against imminent death, serious physical injury, kidnapping, sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat, or other felony involving the use of force, or under those circumstances permitted pursuant to KRS 503.055; and

(b) Under the circumstances as they actually exist, the person whom he seeks to protect would himself have been justified under KRS 503.050 and 503.060 in using such protection. *emphasis added


The concealed carry permit does not impart any obligation to defend anyone not even yourself. The law does require absolute certainty that force is justified when defending another. Regardless of how things look, if the circumstances as they exist, not only appear, do NOT support the use of force then the use of force is unlawful.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
8. Un-rec for wrong.
No one was in the crowd with a firearm. First responder with a firearm was inside the safeway, and came out, into view of the shooter only after he was disarmed.


Now, to answer your question, it becomes clear rather quickly who is shooting at random or fleeing unarmed bystanders. Friend/foe fight or flight response is quite strong in humans, and it is not difficult to identify a threat, even today, so far removed from our hunter-gatherer roots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cyrano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Dear AtheistCrusader: Thank you for your insight as to who
is a friend/foe, and that "... it is not difficult identify a threat..."

And I'm also impressed with your "knowledge" that "No one was in the crowd with a firearm."

But what I'm most grateful for is that I don't live anywhere near you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #10
26. That sounds a bit like a personal attack.
Edited on Sun Feb-13-11 05:21 PM by AtheistCrusader
Do you have some evidence in favor of your fear?

Anecdotal Story time:

I was going in to a kickboxing place to work out. About 20 feet from the door. I look up and I see two men in stained, sweaty t-shirts, wearing aviator-type sunglasses heading right for me, both armed with AR-15's. I'm legally carrying a firearm. In about a second, I notice two things: one the barrels are down, away from me, and there are two uniformed police officers about 50 feet behind them, moving up with service pistols drawn, clearly in support.

It took me less time to recognize that these two men, who were not wearing badges, or any police-identifying marks, meant me no harm, than it did for me to complete my 'go-no-go' decision to draw my weapon. (good thing too, because the odds were well against me)

Turns out, the sweaty, pudgy fellows with the rifles were in fact, police officers, and all four officers were responding to a malfunctioning silent alarm at the Wells Fargo Bank, immediately next door, behind me.


It is not hard for those of us who use, and carry firearms, to not only recognize each other when concealed carrying, but to recognize, or be cognizant of another person's intent, when we see something suspicious.


Now, challenge time for you. If you disagree with my contention that humans are very capable of assessing risk, very rapidly, certainly you can cite lots of instances where civilians carrying concealed weapons have shot at, or been shot by police officers, non-uniformed police officers, or each other.

I can point to an abundance of instances of concealed carry civilians exercising an over-abundance of caution, such as the Tyler Tx courthouse shooting, or the Tacoma Mall shooting a couple years ago, even Arizona, where law-abiding concealed weapons carrying civilians either didn't make the situation worse, or actively helped inhibit an active shooter, WITHOUT shooting innocent people.

Edit: I base my assessment that there was no one in the crowd with a firearm, upon the reports from multiple media outlets, indicating none, and that the fellow inside the Safeway was the first armed responder. If you have evidence otherwise, please cite it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #10
28. The news reports are easy to search and read.
I'm glad I didn't go to a school anywhere near you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sharesunited Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
11. This is a guns-as-solution-to-guns problem. Doesn't need to be that way!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guitar man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #11
47. Uh, yeah
Let's use the "standing unarmed and helpless in front of an armed criminal solution". You first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyRingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
14. The key phrase is "return fire".
That assumes deadly shots have already been fired, and it takes a specially trained individual to risk their life by drawing and firing back knowing that a miss will bring the offender's full attention to them. Shooting under pressure, even by trained police officers results in less than 20% accuracy. In a revolver, that's only slightly more than one bullet that will hit the target. If it isn't fatal, the defender has to pray on the run. That's why in a firefight so many rounds are expended with realatively few hits. Most people who aren't in movies just empty the magazine in 5 seconds then open their eyes to see what happened.

Too many people think carrying a gun naturally expounds upon them all the cold bravery of Rambo, the sharpwitted legal acumen of Matlock, and the eternal invulnerability of Iron Man. In a real bullet flying situation those Hollywood characters come out as a amalagated lump in the seat of your pants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
16. You don't 'draw' until you identify the threat.
First priority- seek cover.

Second priority- assess. Has the shooting stopped. Is the shooting coming closer. Are you in immediate danger. If so..

Next priority- identify threat. Who is shooting? Where are they?

Next priority- assess. Are you likely to be able to get a shot off without endangering others? If not, are there other means of incapacitating the shooter? If so, go for it. If not..

Then and only then would one draw and engage.

Once subdued (by either means), re-holster, and re-assess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ManiacJoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
17. You are trying to make this more difficult than necessary.
Since do not know who the Bad Guy is, you do not have a target to be shooting at; thus you do not shoot. Keep watching, keep looking, stay alert. Until you positively ID the Bad Guy, you have no need to be shooting anyone.

It really is that simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kudzu22 Donating Member (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
18. This isn't the movies
I don't go charging into battle to rescue people. My gun is for *self* defense, so the person to shoot is the one who is threatening me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Porterhouse Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. The majority of us CCW holders
are of the same mind but you will NEVER get the gun control crowd to admit it. I have come to the conclusion that all they have left are shrill emotions short on facts because they have lost the 2nd Amendment battle and they just have a hard time accepting it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QuintinInAlaska Donating Member (10 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. +1 on that, n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #22
30. Do you know what Arizona's concealed carry law is?? Here ...
Basically, if you are 21 or older, you can carry a concealed weapon. No permit or training required.

The new law went into effect on July 29th 2010.

Starting today, Arizona residents at least 21 years old can carry a concealed weapon without a permit.

(snip)

The law is one of many passed by the state Legislature this past session that go into effect today. Arizona joins Alaska and Vermont as the only states to allow concealed weapons without a permit.


In AZ, we aren't talking about people who have been trained, passed a test, or demonstrated their proficiency and knowledge of the responsibilities and dangers involved.

Bottom line, any yahoo 21 or older can conceal and carry, no problem.

Not like anything might ever go wrong in that scenario.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. wrong location
Edited on Sun Feb-13-11 07:14 PM by JoePhilly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Porterhouse Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. Time will tell
although there doesn't seem to be a problem yet but like said, time will tell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #22
38. +1 Take away insults and anecdotes, and 90% of what they post would be gone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
24. That's easy
Nobody unless you just saw them shoot Giffords or another innocent person.

All of this is addressed in any concealed carry class you may attend.

About 90% of those classes is the law and procedures concerning when you can legally shoot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 04:26 PM
Response to Original message
25. Dangerous animals ...
and inanimate objects.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
29. pulling your EDC in a crowd is a good way to get shot.
In a case like Arizona the last thing you do is try and be a hero. It's just as easy for a responding officer to mistake you for a shooter as it is for another CCer.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
33. AZ does not even require a permit to conceal and carry.
As of July 29th 2010, any one over 21 can do so with no permit.

So clearly, everyone doing so will know exactly how to behave if and when the bullets start to fly.

After all, what could possibly go wrong??

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Glassunion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #33
41. Anyone over 21? I would say not. Check the law on that one.
Yes, no permit is required, however not just "anyone over 21" is legally able to carry.

"After all, what could possibly go wrong??" - I dunno? You tell me. You can use Vermont as your base line. You do realize they do not require permits either. Vermont has been doing it the longest out of the states that so not require a permit to legally carry concealed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
34. I carry my gun to protect myself
not play dirty harry as most gun control advocates think we would.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-13-11 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
37. A volunteer fireman once told me
regarding all of the various kinds of things that might burn and required special training to handle, "If you don't know, don't go."

Same thing. If you aren't absolutely sure, don't do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lawodevolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 12:45 AM
Response to Original message
40. no one was armed where gabby was shot
there was a guy with a gun in a store who was not at the location but arrived later after the shooting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Callisto32 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
42. That is extremely fact-specific.
Edited on Tue Feb-15-11 08:59 AM by Callisto32
I know that answer seems like a cop-out, but I really don't know what kind of criteria you could put into place ahead of time.

I would say that a person holding a weapon looking around intently, obviously attempting to identify the correct target will probably look/be acting far differently than an "active shooter," who will look/be acting differently yet from a person who just shot a specific person. Just a guess, though.

Edit to add: This post was intended to say what I thought the police might do upon reaching the scene. For a CCW holder? I would say get out if you can, take cover if you can't get out, and if an opportunity presents itself for you end the situation, take it. But the weapon stays holstered until the target is identified and you have ascertained that the shot is otherwise safe (nobody behind/near target, no bullet will travel heaven-knows-how-far-and-toward-whom, et cetera).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenStormCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 09:02 AM
Response to Original message
43. Proof that there were people in the crowd who were armed?
So far we only know of just the one citizen who was inside the store and didn't get outside until it was over. Please provide proof of your claim of armed citizens in the crowd.

Please be advised that your concern has never happened in real life, although there have been numerous incidents of CCW permit holders intervening to stop a crime in progress.

To answer your question as a hypothetical. It is pretty easy. BEFORE you draw your gun, you identify the target. When the crazy guy starts shooting everybody it is pretty easy to ID him. He is the one who is shooting at everybody. Draw and take him out, then holster your gun, call 911.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeepnstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
44. I'm not like you.
You, as an armed private citizen, should be seeking defensive cover. Keep your weapon holstered and be on the lookout. If confronted with the active shooter you have every right to defend yourself. Unless you're trained in and a real part of an active shooter response response you're better off seeking cover than seeking glory.

Me? I've had active shooter training. If I were in my home county, I'd probably do what I'm supposed to do and proceed towards the sound of the gunfire and look for our shooter. Once I made an identification of the suspect, I'd issue a challenge, and fire to stop the aggression if necessary. If I were not in my home county then I'd just look for cover. My response would also be different if I had my wife and kids with me, in that case I'd be looking for cover or a route of escape for them.

Shooting isn't an automatic response. You have to follow a continuum of force. Even though that continuum might escalate rapidly in the case of an active shooter you still have to stick with the training. I've had to take that right up to the point of deciding to shoot or not to shoot. Just because you're armed doesn't mean you must shoot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Euromutt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
45. Short answer: at whoever's shooting at other people who aren't holding a weapon
As other posters have noted, this requires some amount of time to observe and evaluate, but I think my short answer makes a decent rule of thumb.

Other possible answers: the person who's changing magazines with the slide of his (or, less frequently, her) autoloader locked back; that's the individual who's already been shooting.
Or, based on other examples of mass shootings: the guy who brought a long gun to a shopping mall. Particularly if it's a cheap semi-auto rifle (SKS variant, AK knockoff or Hi-Point carbine) or pump-action shotgun (Maverick or Mossberg 500-series).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guitar man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
46. Whoever is shooting at me
Or is about to shoot at me. My weapon is for self defense, not for trying to be a hero.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
48. This situation doesn't happen.
The simple fact is, today only 2 states in the Union don't allow concealed carry. Yet we do not have problems of friendly fire between concealed carry permit holders and/or police.

The primary reason is that it's usually pretty simple to figure out who the bad guys is - he's the person everyone is running away from and who is shooting defenseless people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
49. If you can't positively identify a target AND be sure that your backdrop is safe, you don't shoot
By "backdrop" I mean where your bullet will go if it misses or passes through the intended target.

If you aren't completely sure that you have a good shot at a good target, you don't shoot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kennah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-15-11 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
50. Consider the sad case of David Zaback
In February 1990, David Zaback attempted to rob a Seattle area gunshop. Back then, Washington was among a small handful of Right To Carry states, and in a gunshop, well I think it's safe to assume most people are carrying.

Zaback has his own Snopes entry, and I suspect he is characterized as an archetype of the Darwin Award recipient.
http://www.snopes.com/crime/dumdum/gunshop.asp

A search of the Seattle Times archives will turn up four references to Zaback's untimely demise.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?dat...
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?dat...
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?dat...
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?dat...

As I try to place myself into the shoes of store clerk Danny Morris, there are two things of which I'm very confident.

#1 - I know from all of my training that I could have and would have fired on Zaback, and I would have fired until he dropped his gun or fell.

#2 - I know that I would not derive pleasure or joy from it.

There are those who see the killing of an assailant as a God given right to be extolled, and these are usually very odd, and lying through their teeth, RW teabag loonies.

Reality is that there are many factors that deter people from killing other people, even when one is under attack. Legal, moral, religious, and ethical to name a few. It's not an easy or fun thing to do. Thankfully I've never had to, and if I go to the grave having never killing another person I will consider that an achievement.

From one of the archives news accounts:
"Zaback's father, Duane Zaback, said his son had been unsuccessfully searching for work and that he suffered from schizophrenia. 'Sometimes he wasn't rational at all,' his father said."

Multiple people inside the gunshop drew guns, but only two fired--Officer Timothy Lally and store clerk Danny Morris, whom I suspect was the one closest to Zaback.

It is impossible to "what if" a situation being described in a DU post, or reconstructed from news accounts. If one could account for and describe 100 factors, then there are likely another 100 one did not describe but which still existed.

The bottomline is that people react to a situation based upon how they are trained and what they see presented to them.

If one is seeking an answer to the question, "Yeah, but when can I shoot?" then perhaps one should rethink carrying a gun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 25th 2014, 06:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC