Do Concealed Carry permit holders really live in a dream world?

[we are not amused]

bthr22 had exactly right! It is not what other people may do or how they may react, it is how you react!
Obviously training helps, but this piece of bad journalism was put together with the aid of the VCP, and it has been pointed out how bad it was. There are plenty of well documented cases where concealed carry holders have saved lives, and other than to point out bad it was and to heap shame upon ABC for airing it, I am not sure there is much to be learned from it. Better scenarios would be a much better training aid.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

bthr22 had exactly right! It is not what other people may do or how they may react, it is how you react!

Sure, and Brandon McKown reacted very poorly at Tacoma Mall.

This guy reacted very poorly to a non-shooting situation, but was trying to be helpful. Sometimes, a little training in proper procedures would go a long way to helping people. http://www.idahostatesman.com/2011/07/28/1742051/boise-police-man-arrested-after.html

 

[we are not amused]

Sure, and Brandon McKown reacted very poorly at Tacoma Mall.

This guy reacted very poorly to a non-shooting situation, but was trying to be helpful. Sometimes, a little training in proper procedures would go a long way to helping people. http://www.idahostatesman.com/2011/07/28/1742051/boise-police-man-arrested-after.html

Not sure what you meant by McKown reacting very poorly at the Mall? He is credited with stopping the rampage at horrific cost to himself. Should he have opened fire without warning? Probably, but I wasn't there, and second guessing is just that. The shooter did change tactics which led to his capture without further injury or loss of life, so McKown did something right. His actions saved lives.

As for your second example, well intentioned idiots do come out of the woodwork from time to time, he was apparently well intentioned, and hopefully the misdemeanor charges he received will convince him to be more careful next time. I am not sure what this has to do with CCW's responding to shooting spree's, as he was not identified as such, and the cops were already there. Perhaps as an example of what not to do?

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Not sure what you meant by McKown reacting very poorly at the Mall? He is credited with stopping the rampage at horrific cost to himself. Should he have opened fire without warning? Probably, but I wasn't there, and second guessing is just that. The shooter did change tactics which led to his capture without further injury or loss of life, so McKown did something right. His actions saved lives.

McKown didn't even have his gun drawn when he yelled at the shooter. He stood up from behind cover and yelled at the guy. That was an absolutely stupid thing to do. The fact that McKown had a gun was totally immaterial to the situation because he did not have it drawn, did not threaten the shooter with it, and did not try to shoot the shooter. He reacted very poorly.

If you read McKown's own statements from the event, he spoke of how he carried a gun to protect people from this very sort of thing. Then when the time came, he acted in the worst possible way. So yeah, McKown was living in a dream world, believing he would be the big rescuer with his gun because he carried a gun to protect people. He could not even use a gun to protect himself.

Now was it like in the video of the OP where McKown didn't have time? Nope. McKown drew his gun, then feared he might be shot by the cops or arrested for brandishing, and put it back so that when he stood up from behind the planter that provided him with cover and yelled at the shooter, he was just as ineffectual as ever other shooting victim in the mall that day. He claims that part of the reason he didn't shoot the shooter was because he knew he would have to shoot him in the head, but because of the distance, McKown was fearful he could not make the shot and might hit somebody else, so he didn't try at all.

He walked to the front of the store to see what was going on, and took a defensive posture, crouched to one side in the store’s entrance. He had his gun out, but tucked it back into his belt, under his clothes, after thinking better of it.

Meanwhile, Maldonado walked past the Kits store. McKown, standing, said to Maldonado, “I think you need to put that gun down, young man.”

McKown’s hand was back near his gun. Maldonado swung his barrel over and opened fired from the hip.

As he felt the bullets enter his body, “I felt like an idiot,” McKown said. “I carried a gun to protect my fellow man,” but it hadn’t worked out that way.

since the original links are dead, see post 20 http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188599&highlight=tacoma+mall

Carrying isn't nearly as effective as using. Now McKown is crippled for life, resigned to a wheelchair with several residue physical challenged from his injuries. If you read that article to the bottom, there were at least two other people at the mall with guns that day, and neither one of them did anything of consequence with their guns either to stop the shooter.

 

[we are not amused]

So every one with a CHL should be disarmed? That is stupid! Besides what do his mistakes have to do with that agenda driven piece of poor journalism that ABC put out?
Besides, mistakes or not, his actions changed the Shooter's course of action, leading to his capture with no further injuries or fatalities. I consider that a success. If you think he was a useless fool, then that's your opinion.
If you want to stand by, and do nothing if a madman starts shooting up your friends, family and passerby's, well that is your choice. It would not be mine. I would honor anyone who tried to do something, even if they charged the guy barehanded.
It is very easy for a bunch of know it all, armchair generals to second guess and critic the actions of others, or to dream up scenarios realistic or not where certain actions would work or fail.
That is what the VPC and ABC News did with this disgusting propaganda.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

So every one with a CHL should be disarmed? That is stupid!

Wow, you really misread what I said. Never claimed gun owners should be disnarmed. I did claim that McKown's gun did not change the situation and based on the reports of the police spokesperson at the time that there were two other folks there that day with guns who did nothing with them either. All those people with guns that they undoubtedly carry for self defense and not one of them attempted to use their guns. McKown stupidly engaged the shooter from behind cover without his gun even drawn. For all the good his gun did him, he might as well have been disarmed.

 

[we are not amused]

Wow, you really misread what I said. Never claimed gun owners should be disnarmed. I did claim that McKown's gun did not change the situation and based on the reports of the police spokesperson at the time that there were two other folks there that day with guns who did nothing with them either. All those people with guns that they undoubtedly carry for self defense and not one of them attempted to use their guns. McKown stupidly engaged the shooter from behind cover without his gun even drawn. For all the good his gun did him, he might as well have been disarmed.

The point of the ABC hit piece was to disarm the public, and was a direct attack on CCW holders. Perhaps you are not arguing that concealed carry is a bad idea, but it sounds like it. My apologies if I misunderstood your attack on McKown. I still regard him as a hero, and I think you misunderstood what happened there yourself. Several accounts credit McKown's confrontation with changing the behavior of the shooter, leading to to his eventual capture without loss of life or further injury. Just because he may have made mistakes, they should be taken as a learning experience, not a reason to bad mouth him. At least one of the other CCW's at the Mall stated that they did not shoot because they could not get a clear field of fire, sounds responsible to me.
I am not going to claim that having a CCW makes one invulnerable, or is perfect solution to the problem that the police can't be everywhere, but it does offer options. I would much rather that a madman such as the mall shooter encountered armed resistance early in his spree, rather than wait for the cops to show up. "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away", is something every one should keep in mind.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Perhaps you are not arguing that concealed carry is a bad idea, but it sounds like it.

Again, you misread.

Since you think McKown is such a CCW hero, can you tell me how he effectively used his gun to stop the shooter at the Tacoma Mall, or did he behave like he was unarmed when he stood up from behind cover and yelled at the shooter who then shot him to pieces? Where was the gun that McKown carried to protect other people? It was stuck in his pants. That, sir, is foolish. McKown even commented that the shooter was quicker on the draw than he was. Ya think? The shooter had his gun out and ready to go. McKown had his stuck in his pants. McKown's CCW status had nothing to do with the situation other than McKown went on TV and talked about he carried a gun to protect others in a crisis...and then didn't use it for that purpose when the time came.

McKown was not prepared to use his gun. McKown was not skilled enough to use his gun. McKown did not understand tactics well enough to even have his gun ready.

 

[Kleanbore]

What to Do?

We have had a lot of good discussion about what was wrong with the ABC experiment. I don't think we need any more.

We have discussed the importance of training.

We have had a good analysis about how an armed citizen did just about everything wrong in the Tacoma Mall shooting.

Has this run its course, or can someone offer some good advice on how a trained person in the scenario presented in the ABC study should have reacted, and using the Tacoma Mall shooting as another scenario, what an armed ctizen should have done? Contrasting that with what not to do would be OK.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Has this run its course, or can someone offer some good advice on how a trained person in the scenario presented in the ABC study should have reacted, and using the Tacoma Mall shooting as another scenario, what an armed ctizen should have done?...

The thing is that the answers to those sorts of questions will depend on exactly what happens. One of the expectations for good training and good practice is that with it one's handling of the mechanics -- drawing the gun and shooting -- become reflexive. And so one's attention can focus on assessing the situation, deciding on action and acting.

Looking at the videos, we see clumsy gun handling and presentation. We also see a failure to use cover and concealment and to move "off the X." It looks like the defender(s) needed to note where the attacker was directing his fire, aggressively move in a different direction, and not make himself an obvious target -- all while smoothly drawing and engaging. That is very tough to do. Of course, it's even tougher to do, and won't be done, without good training.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I agree with fiddletown on this. The basis of any good defense/reaction is training and practice.

Training will allow you to do everything you need reflexively...moving and drawing...while you use your now freed conscious mind to evaluate your options and plan, then execute, your course of action.

Even more important is your commitment to action...that is, the willingness to do what has to be done. It has been my experience that folks will often not avail themselves of force options available to them because they haven't thought that course of action through and accepted the consequences that follow making that choice.

You have to remember that having a gun isn't a magic sword and shield, it is only through training proficiency and a willingness to use it that allows you to make a deference in a critical incident.

 

[Kleanbore]

Thanks. That should do it for this one.