Pistol Safety

[greasemonkeyok]

The shooter had the advantages of surprise and planning. He had multiple targets, not just one.

The audience had the disadvantages of surprise and no planning, i.e., the time to process the events and make decisions as circumstances change.

It is pure fantasy to speculate what you would have done had you been there if you weren't there. What Car Doc is pointing out is the difficulty of hitting a moving target in dim light. Surly those facts would have been processed by an experienced shooter in the audience.

 

[Car Doc]

Aren't you doing the same thing or am I misreading?

Exactly but I am trying to affirm the obvious rather than point out the obvious we all know the odds.

 

[TripleR]

Exactly but I am trying to affirm the obvious rather than point out the obvious we all know the odds.

OK, so my position is that the odds of affecting the outcome with a weapon are higher than without and I do agree they would be poor either way. My choice would be to have been armed. I qualified several times per year live fire on regular courses of timed fire, in tactical exercises as well as yearly FATS and shot a lot on my own including in the dark and am under no illusions of how effective I could have been, only that I would have had more options if armed.

 

[jonyyuma]

Good, Glad we could agree, certainly a Lively subject...Most of us over 50 yoa too...

 

[Car Doc]

OK, so my position is that the odds of affecting the outcome with a weapon are higher than without and I do agree they would be poor either way. My choice would be to have been armed. I qualified several times per year live fire on regular courses of timed fire, in tactical exercises as well as yearly FATS and shot a lot on my own including in the dark and am under no illusions of how effective I could have been, only that I would have had more options if armed.

Me too except it was a gun free zone.

That in itself is the biggest debatable issue as far as I am concerned. Go in armed and break the law or follow the law that allows an insane idiot in to slaughter everyone in sight and noone be able to defend their selves???

Me I carry in no gun zones not federal or court houses but I am armed so flame away guys it is what it is some of us carry all the time and always have even before the cch.

If they start using metal detectors I will happily leave my weapons in the truck.

edit: The other thing is this as a cch if I do happen to be in a situation (believe me its crossed my mind or else) I see a situation a gun comes out in a gun free zone or a gun friendly zone and I am armed (and this is what we are trained to do in gun friendly zones) as bad as it sounds. I would disappear behind cover as best as I could unless it was pointed at me or a loved one or I was certain someone was about to die. We are not a vigilantes and shouldn't plan on being one. A LEO would be obligated to intervene we are not!

Just for conversation but-How many guys on here with permits would want some of the people you took your test with or shoot with a the range opening up in a supermarket or a theater defending a loved one or their selves? I still fight for their right to do so with everything I stand for but just sayin......

 

[pacerron]

OK, so my position is that the odds of affecting the outcome with a weapon are higher than without and I do agree they would be poor either way. My choice would be to have been armed. I qualified several times per year live fire on regular courses of timed fire, in tactical exercises as well as yearly FATS and shot a lot on my own including in the dark and am under no illusions of how effective I could have been, only that I would have had more options if armed.

I agree that you would have had more options than all the unarmed folks and I support concealed carry with proper training.
What you have not discussed is if you had been there and discharged your weapon in the crowd what do you think would happen to you when the police arrived and saw you with a weapon or someone pointed you out to them as being a shooter? What is your trained procedure
for putting your weapon down and assuming a position that might keep the police from shooting you?

 

[TripleR]

Me too except it was a gun free zone.

That in itself is the biggest debatable issue as far as I am concerned. Go in armed and break the law or follow the law that allows an insane idiot in to slaughter everyone in sight and noone be able to defend their selves???

Me I carry in no gun zones not federal or court houses but I am armed so flame away guys it is what it is some of us carry all the time.

If they start using metal detectors I will happily leave my weapons in the truck.

I posted on here or another thread that our local theater is a "gun free zone" too, so I just don't go.

You sure won't get flamed by me for carrying.

 

[jonyyuma]

Me too except it was a gun free zone.

That in itself is the biggest debatable issue as far as I am concerned. Go in armed and break the law or follow the law that allows an insane idiot in to slaughter everyone in sight and noone be able to defend their selves???

Me I carry in no gun zones not federal or court houses but I am armed so flame away guys it is what it is some of us carry all the time.

If they start using metal detectors I will happily leave my weapons in the truck.

Our Mall had such signs, they changed ownership, and were removed...I had carried there for years, it is a target rich enviroment, especially when you return to your car and are occupied by carrying packages?

 

[greasemonkeyok]

Interesting point Car Doc. If a business advertises it is "gun free" by a sign on the door, what is their duty to their patrons to insure it is, in fact, "gun free."

 

[jonyyuma]

Interesting point Car Doc. If a business advertises it is "gun free" by a sign on the door, what is their duty to their patrons to insure it is, in fact, "gun free."

As stated before, they have Gun free zones in schools, any body care to look-up how many are found in todays schools..Plus they use metal detectors?????