tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post7786717828310793617..comments2023-03-20T02:00:41.043-07:00Comments on Anything You Want: If only someone else had a gun...Donn Christiansonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04265903775692067280noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-42325735602024754642013-12-31T19:21:13.477-08:002013-12-31T19:21:13.477-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.practicalman45https://www.blogger.com/profile/05216387862357870616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-17999199875482324212012-12-20T21:28:09.625-08:002012-12-20T21:28:09.625-08:00Izus, I appreciate your comment. It strikes me as...Izus, I appreciate your comment. It strikes me as balanced. Yeah, I'd try too. I don't think I could not.Donn Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04265903775692067280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-44055778181195103322012-12-20T20:43:31.033-08:002012-12-20T20:43:31.033-08:00In various competitions I've shot paper target...In various competitions I've shot paper targets, falling plates, clay...you name it. When you're practicing, all is easy. When you're on the line, even just in a match, no life or death situation, everything changes; heart rate, breathing, nerves...I believe you would have to be damn lucky not to quickly join the victims...but I'd still try<br />JohnAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10416798266023920006noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-21502419804561130572012-12-19T14:08:58.245-08:002012-12-19T14:08:58.245-08:00Sorry, Apeface, I think I deleted it by mistake an...Sorry, Apeface, I think I deleted it by mistake and it's non-recoverable. You are free to post it again if you wish. However, allow me to give you a note on what I read.<br /><br />While I agree with you that people have the right, sometimes the responsibility to defend themselves, please keep in mind the context of this article.<br /><br />I do not think more guns are the solution and most people will not *ever* have the level of training necessary to take on an armed shooter with a AR-15 in a crowded environment.<br /><br />Again, you are free to respond again. Donn Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04265903775692067280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-2119200986820110572012-12-19T12:22:14.056-08:002012-12-19T12:22:14.056-08:00you deleted my post? what was wrong with it.. >...you deleted my post? what was wrong with it.. >( Apefacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12440173354925843913noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-64056218124564433922012-08-06T12:30:32.889-07:002012-08-06T12:30:32.889-07:00Not likely. Remember that he had flooded the thea...Not likely. Remember that he had flooded the theater with tear gas, which would have precluded any "defense."BlueDeaconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05641178784714584337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-84902292148432796162012-07-24T08:03:18.719-07:002012-07-24T08:03:18.719-07:00Thanks for taking the time to respond as you did. ...Thanks for taking the time to respond as you did. I appreciate it.Donn Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04265903775692067280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-42960754631871585232012-07-24T08:02:20.656-07:002012-07-24T08:02:20.656-07:00Great response. Thanks.Great response. Thanks.Donn Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04265903775692067280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-79872220900981865552012-07-23T21:36:31.693-07:002012-07-23T21:36:31.693-07:00"Look, I know what you are trying to say here...<i>"Look, I know what you are trying to say here. You are trying but, don't mistake my measure of the difficulty of the task as something about me. This is not about me. I was using my training and experience for an example -- nothing more."</i><br /><br />It's not specifically about you, but you offer a good contrast to these shooters who do go into chaotic situations--of their own creation--often with little actual training and kill many, many people. In this case, this Holmes guy killed 12. Seung-Hui Cho shot and killed many more at Virginia Tech. <br /><br />The reason why they were "successful" is they don't have the normal resistance to killing other people normal people have, created a "target rich" environment for themselves by essentially making everyone else a target, and generally resolved the whole question of shoot/no shoot before-hand by creating the situation. <br /><br />That's why it would be and is such a challenge for even trained people in such a situation and what many people making the suggestion "If only someone there was armed..." don't completely comprehend.<br /><br />And then there's--like you point out--lack of preparation on the part of civilian shooters.<br /><br />For me personally, I used to own a couple of pistols and would change what I carried based on clothing or how I felt that day. After walking into a training class with my more frequent concealed carry gun and finding myself fighting my training based on the pistol I've shot the most, I sold off the concealed carry pistol and have stuck with the somewhat "petite" pistol I've practiced with the most.<br /><br />I think--just doing that, focusing on a single pistol--probably would be a gift to myself should I ever actually need to employ it. Thousands of rounds and--at the very least--I can run the gun I have without much focus on it.<br /><br />The rest--identifying when there's a problem, identifying what the problem is, and reacting appropriately to the problem in an effective manner--that's still a question unless/until I'm actually required to "solve that problem" myself.<br /><br />Again, I'm not assuming your assessment of the difficulty of the task as being something about you, <i>per se</i>. I'm assuming your assessment would probably apply to most individuals with experience and training and is something inherent in being a normal human being who generally does not desire to arbitrarily kill people (like Holmes, Chu, and others). Willing to--if a damned good reason presented itself--but something done out of necessity and not desire or enjoyment.<br /><br />I would also expect someone who is less trained and prepared is likely to have more problems resolving such a situation in a quick, low-casualty manner.<br /><br />Good luck, and I'll take a look at that other article if I can find it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-30401280286708871142012-07-23T21:31:11.517-07:002012-07-23T21:31:11.517-07:00Absolutely agreed, and you made your point very we...Absolutely agreed, and you made your point very well in your original post. You carefully explained the difficulties and obstacles that would have to have been overcome, and you did it from a position of experience. My point had nothing to do with that, and does not bring your conclusion into question in the slightest.<br /><br />You say, even armed, it would have been all but impossible to stop a determined killer from carrying out his chosen task. "Based on my experience, my training and my examination of the issues, I do know this. The statement that all we needed was a lone hero, a legally carrying individual added to the equation and all would have been well is not reality. I know that argument is based on many things but I don't see how it is based on any real facts." You're right: the fact that both Stawicki and Holmes had a weapon in the first place meant they had the will (and presumably the ability to use said weapons), while an untested civilian would not have had the same luxury, and in the microseconds they had to react, it is doubtful they could have made a difference.<br /><br />My point was, "they were never given the option."Zarryiosiadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15728244518926445784noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-74998697802834644432012-07-23T20:00:16.610-07:002012-07-23T20:00:16.610-07:00Cute use of the alien quote, and appropriate. Wha...Cute use of the alien quote, and appropriate. What should people use? Why, any legal means at their disposal and, if their life is on the line -- any means. Period.<br /><br />Look my article wasn't about RKBA, gun control, or any host of things surrounding this mess of gun violence in this society.<br /><br />It addressed *one* thing. Just *one* thing. <br /><br />That was what my friend calls, "white hat syndrome."<br /><br />In the aftermath of the Cafe Racer shooting here, in Seattle I wrote my response to the people who claimed that someone else with a gun would have stopped the killer. I heard it *again* when the shootings in Aurora happened. <br /><br />That is the only thing my article is about; the blindness to the facts, the ignoring of the reality, of having to address a determined and armed person intent on killing a lot of people.<br /><br />They all made it sound so easy.<br /><br />Well, it's not. That was my point; addressing the internet heroes out there.<br /><br />That was all it was about.Donn Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04265903775692067280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-49391706708595585842012-07-23T17:09:01.494-07:002012-07-23T17:09:01.494-07:00I’m not certain how you came to the conclusion tha...I’m not certain how you came to the conclusion that I thought your original post advocated against defending yourself or another from the imminent threat of grave bodily injury or death, but if I somehow implied it, it was completely unintentional. Quite the contrary, actually. From your background it is readily apparent that you believe wholeheartedly in placing yourself in harm’s way to protect others. But now that you mention it, your response brings up another important point in this discussion. I apologize in advance if this will come across as being either flippant or sarcastic as neither is intended, but when I read your response, the very first thing that came to mind is a quote from the movie “Aliens.”<br /> <br />“What are we supposed to use, man? Harsh language?”<br /><br />One of the biggest problems with this spate of mass shootings is that we simply have no idea when someone is going to go off the rails. Holmes was a college graduate working on his PH. D., with no history of violence and no criminal record. He bought the guns and ammo legally, and he passed the required background checks necessary to purchase his weapons. So, on paper, James Holmes was the perfect candidate to own a gun.<br /> <br />Now that he’s committed his atrocity, we can look back with perfect clarity and see that there were signs that perhaps something was off. In particular, there are stories now of a gun range owner who found Holmes “creepy” enough to deny his application. I find that more than a bit telling, because if one person sensed it, I’m almost positive others must have as well, but we may never know.<br /><br />You’re right: nothing in your article advocates against defending yourself. But the important point to consider here is not about the right; it is about the means, and by following the laws that Holmes himself ignored, the only means the people in that theater had to defend themselves with was harsh language.Zarryiosiadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15728244518926445784noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-77238684933673733012012-07-23T15:35:02.149-07:002012-07-23T15:35:02.149-07:00Simply stating that it would be a challenge for me...Simply stating that it would be a challenge for me acknowledges, not any deficiency in my own training or preparation (mental and physical. It points out two things:<br />1) How monumentally difficult situations like this can be, even for the well trained (see: winning and losing in my original article).<br />2) The sheer lack of preparedness on the part of most who carry.<br /><br />Look, I know what you are trying to say here. You are trying but, don't mistake my measure of the difficulty of the task as something about me. This is not about me. I was using my training and experience for an example -- nothing more.<br /><br />Thank you.Donn Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04265903775692067280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-20729088641496202322012-07-23T15:26:47.396-07:002012-07-23T15:26:47.396-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-50304903175899072552012-07-23T15:24:51.998-07:002012-07-23T15:24:51.998-07:00"If you continue to draw unfounded conclusion...<i>"If you continue to draw unfounded conclusions from my posts, I will be forced to delete your comments. I never said I was incapable or unwilling to respond. I pointed out just how difficult the situation is, even for the well trained."</i><br /><br />I apologize for any confusion. I should have rephrases that. I mean that your lack of confidence of success--given your stated proficiency--was more likely due to the normal patters of psychological response to a crisis than a lack of gun handling skills or tactical knowledge (assuming you would be carrying a weapon you had trained with). Which tends to be normal for most people, or so I've read. Simply recognizing a threat and generating a proper response is a challenge in some, chaotic situations.<br /><br /><i>"That means not that there should be no guns, but that more guns in that situation would have unlikely made any difference. The problem isn't the number of guns (arguing for or against gun control). The problem is them getting into the hands of people who should not have them."</i><br /><br />In general, I agree with you, except you need to substitute "any lethal weapon/technology" for guns. Which is where I diverge because--frankly--we live surrounded by potentially lethal technology. <br /><br />I mean, when I heard about smoke grenades and booby traps, I was honestly waiting for the second, more lethal event. Two months of preparation, the creation of enough IED's to require two days to render safe, and this guy just stopped at 12 dead when he could have done a lot more damage.<br /><br />That's the scary part and why I totally agree on identifying the wrong hands before an event, but it's got to be more than guns we're concerned with.<br /><br />So, once again, I apologize for any misconception from what I wrote.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-48300788559622037902012-07-23T15:11:00.260-07:002012-07-23T15:11:00.260-07:00A good response. Thank you.
However, nothing i...A good response. Thank you. <br /><br />However, nothing in my article advocates against defending yourself or another from the imminent threat of grave bodily injury or death.<br /><br />I'm guilty of nothing except applying my life and experience in offering an informed opinion on this subject.Donn Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04265903775692067280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-65537361619724256742012-07-23T15:03:30.198-07:002012-07-23T15:03:30.198-07:00There are many different grades of armour. I have...There are many different grades of armour. I have read conflicting accounts of what he was wearing. If he was wearing the bare minimum of what was reported, it would take some luck and skill to deal with him.Donn Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04265903775692067280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-85766514927231291542012-07-23T15:01:47.913-07:002012-07-23T15:01:47.913-07:00"As you've described yourself, in spite o..."As you've described yourself, in spite of being proficient and trained, you doubt your ability to face down a shooter like this and succeed."<br /><br />If you continue to draw unfounded conclusions from my posts, I will be forced to delete your comments. I never said I was incapable or unwilling to respond. I pointed out just how difficult the situation is, even for the well trained.<br /><br />Please retain some intellectual honesty if you are going to participate here.<br /><br />I never said that the guns are the problem. Please read what I wrote.<br /><br />Here is what I wrote: <br />"The problem is not that there should have been more firearms at Cafe Racer or in Aurora, Colorado. The problem is that Stawicki and Holmes had them."<br /><br />That means not that there should be no guns, but that more guns in that situation would have unlikely made any difference. The problem isn't the number of guns (arguing for or against gun control). The problem is them getting into the hands of people who should not have them.<br /><br />Until we, as a society, are brave enough to address this, we will revisit tragedies like this again.Donn Christiansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04265903775692067280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-40036023288891725282012-07-23T14:58:21.048-07:002012-07-23T14:58:21.048-07:00Yeah, I should have read that a little closer duri...Yeah, I should have read that a little closer during the preview... There<-->their issues.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-5019391523099339882012-07-23T14:53:31.599-07:002012-07-23T14:53:31.599-07:00the colorado shooter was wearing a tac vest, not b...the colorado shooter was wearing a tac vest, not body armor. correct?Doc_Judehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03991780234177409042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-82979989611392704102012-07-23T14:50:20.592-07:002012-07-23T14:50:20.592-07:00"No, you have it all wrong wrong. The proble...<i>"No, you have it all wrong wrong. The problem is not that there should have been more firearms at Cafe Racer or in Aurora, Colorado. The problem is that Stawicki and Holmes had them."</i><br /><br />Did you miss the part in the news where it took 2 days for the bomb squad to clear the IED's in Holmes' apartment?<br /><br />Except for the fact Holmes probably wanted to pull the trigger first hand, I'm going to posit the people of Aurora are probably better off that he had a gun instead of utilizing the planning and effort he made into IED's to do even more damage.<br /><br />The problem isn't that these people have guns--unless that's the ONLY tool in their toolbox--it's that they have the desire to kill other people and acted on it. There choice of a gun is often as much a limitation to their ability to kill as it is an advantage. <br /><br />As you've described yourself, in spite of being proficient and trained, you doubt your ability to face down a shooter like this and succeed. However, these shooters have done that very same thing and succeeded. What's the difference?<br /><br />It isn't the guns or access to guns. It's the differences in their minds that both motivated them to kill people and to do so in a planned manner. These men took advantage of the natural resistance to pulling the trigger on another human and the delay as a normal mind struggles to both recognize the situation as dangerous and take action in their targets in order to create one-sided situations they could use to kill people.<br /><br />This a personality trait, not a technological limitation.<br /><br />For another illustration of this, watch footage of the North Hollywood Bank Robbery from 1997. Technically, anyone could have stopped these guys if they got close enough and were able to put enough rounds into peripheral locations until a lethal shot was available. This is--for normal people--a pretty emotionally challenging task.<br /><br />Consider what snipers in Iraq were doing facing a vaguely similar situation with well-armored enemies. <br /><br />The difference is mentality and a willingness to realize what's going in, accept killing the enemy for whatever reason, and then reacting in a trained manner.<br /><br />The third alternative is to simply but psychological distance between the act of killing and the thought of it. Ergo: using an IED remotely.<br /><br />However, the problem isn't the guns, the guns in the situation, or even who has the guns, it's the willingness to overcome the resistance to killing other people that's the problem with these people. Identifying this trait is how you stop these killers, especially the intelligent, socially non-unsuccessful*, people who have the ability to plan ahead like most of these guys do. Not having an "easy" plan A doesn't normally stop them, it only ratchets them up to a slightly harder plan B, which--for guys like Holmes--has the potential for being a whole lot more deadly.<br /><br />* - I used "non-unsuccessful" because most of these guys aren't particularly socially successful, but they tend to not fail enough to become obvious to most people. If they were unsuccessful socially, they would likely be identified a whole lot sooner and measures--like treatment, incarceration, etc.--could be applied preventing their later success.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-8493653033426930032012-07-23T14:35:47.133-07:002012-07-23T14:35:47.133-07:00As a legal, licensed concealed carry holder in Tex...As a legal, licensed concealed carry holder in Texas, I have often thought about all of your points (and many are an ongoing discussion, research, and continual review!). I do realize the numerous concerns and limitations that you have addressed. However, as Lt. Col. Dave Grossman so skillfully points out, the very best situation is the one that NEVER HAPPENED. This point may not apply in the Aurora, Colorado murders, but had the theater not been 'posted' to prevent those legally carrying - would this killer have even attempted this crime? He seems to have quietly surrendered once confronted by the police (as opposed to those who plan their death by police as the last violation act of their crime). Had he feared being stopped, or someone actually killing him, since concealed carry is very common in Colorado - except where they can't legally carry – and those places are clearly identified (and I would think, noted by those criminals that plan harm and disregard (no – better put as they use them) to find a path of least resistant and most likely to succeed. Realistically, in ’this case’ he would have just chosen a different 'soft' target - with a large number of unarmed people. The deterrent effect probably does stop many opportunistic crimes and shouldn't be discounted. Back to your well-presented comments - I prepare as best as I can as a 'citizen', and certainly pray that I'm never placed in that position of having to decide to shoot or not shoot. Yet, I think about anyone sitting there in that theater during this terrible crime, that HAD ‘lawfully’ left their gun in their car outside – “Could I have made a difference?”Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03860794315305599800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-49808355248791611232012-07-23T10:10:08.939-07:002012-07-23T10:10:08.939-07:00Thanks for this post; I'm always in favor of a...Thanks for this post; I'm always in favor of a voice with experience speaking out on any topic. In this case, I also wholeheartedly agree. <br /><br />The issue of violence in our country doesn't get solved by adding more violence. It gets solved by changing the culture of fear in which we're raising our children. A culture that's fed by the media in many forms, and perpetuated by parents who spend much of their time afraid of what might happen. <br /><br />As a father, I want my daughter to believe in the good in the world, and to go out and create some of that good herself. Teaching her to fear what might happen doesn't fix anything.Jayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02060167708095988408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-83425916146508726122012-07-23T09:06:33.431-07:002012-07-23T09:06:33.431-07:00But if you think back to the Gabby Giffords' s...But if you think back to the Gabby Giffords' shooting in Arizona, Joe Zamudio, an armed bystander and hero, admits that he came very close to shooting the wrong guy in the confusion: <br /><br /><br /><br />"The new poster boy for this agenda is Joe Zamudio, a hero in the Tucson incident. Zamudio was in a nearby drug store when the shooting began, and he was armed. He ran to the scene and helped subdue the killer. Television interviewers are celebrating his courage, and pro-gun blogs are touting his equipment. 'Bystander Says Carrying Gun Prompted Him to Help,' says the headline in the Wall Street Journal.<br /><br />"But before we embrace Zamudio's brave intervention as proof of the value of being armed, let's hear the whole story. 'I came out of that store, I clicked the safety off, and I was ready,' he explained on Fox and Friends. 'I had my hand on my gun. I had it in my jacket pocket here. And I came around the corner like this.' Zamudio demonstrated how his shooting hand was wrapped around the weapon, poised to draw and fire. As he rounded the corner, he saw a man holding a gun. 'And that's who I at first thought was the shooter,' Zamudio recalled. 'I told him to 'Drop it, drop it!' '<br /><br />"But the man with the gun wasn't the shooter. He had wrested the gun away from the shooter. 'Had you shot that guy, it would have been a big, fat mess,' the interviewer pointed out.<br /><br />"Zamudio agreed: 'I was very lucky. Honestly, it was a matter of seconds. Two, maybe three seconds between when I came through the doorway and when I was laying on top of [the real shooter], holding him down. So, I mean, in that short amount of time I made a lot of really big decisions really fast. … I was really lucky.'<br /><br />"When Zamudio was asked what kind of weapons training he'd had, he answered: 'My father raised me around guns … so I'm really comfortable with them. But I've never been in the military or had any professional training. I just reacted.'"<br /><br /><br />http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2011/01/friendly_firearms.htmlFlyswatterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03997679735458639416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2417076767169988849.post-76699933463636090262012-07-23T08:59:24.387-07:002012-07-23T08:59:24.387-07:00That's some prize shootin' there!That's some prize shootin' there!Flyswatterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03997679735458639416noreply@blogger.com