There are a number of instances in the U.S. of a gunman being stopped by UNARMED civilians – the grandma when U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was shot in Tucson is just one of the more well-known examples – and meanwhile recently at the Orlando bar, I’ve read a couple of accounts that say at least some of the shooting injuries were due to friendly fire.
More guns does not automatically make things better. There are too many variables in each case.
I never underestimate the fundamental tendency of human beings to be incompetent at most things they try.
I agree that more guns does not automatically make things better. Also that having a gun in such a situation does not always mean that it should be drawn or used. And the Orlando situation has some troubling details. The fact that the shooter had spent a bunch of time observing the security and layout of the place is important. The uniformed guard or bouncers are not there to prevent a shooting, they are more or less the first targets. In my work, one of the things to avoid is looking like an “operator” when doing security duties. It just makes you an obvious target. Thinking about the Orlando situation, the best thing I have been able to come up with is perhaps a bartender or other employee could have been trained and armed. Even then, had the shooter noticed that in his recon, he would just target that person first. But that is just speculation, based on knowing only what has been released. And I have no criticism for those in Orlando, they were as prepared as well as could be expected, considering the risks as they understood them at the time. If the bar had been in Tel Aviv, the perceived risks and security procedures would have been different.
That being said, successful defensive firearm use is pretty common. And it is at it’s most successful when no shot is fired.
That was horrible, and should never have happened. But it is not typical of interactions between criminals and armed citizens. Of course it is hard to quantify crimes prevented, especially defensive gun use where no shots are fired. The data I have read indicates that most of the time, no shots are fired. But sometimes shots are fired. It might be worth noting that your article is almost a year old. That does not make it less horrible, but uncommon, I think.
On the other hand, this is what ten minutes finds me from incidents over the last week:
http://www.krcrtv.com/north-coast-news/news/police-woman-shot-by-homeowner-after-breaking-into-home/40197612
http://www.westplainsdailyquill.net/news/state_news_arkansas/article_280ea226-21fc-5e70-b3f5-2dc2b6143a8c.html
http://bangordailynews.com/2015/09/01/news/midcoast/rockland-resident-shoots-intruder/
Oh- I thought it might be worth having another look at that story, to see if they caught the shooter. Apparently the “rawstory” article was erroneous.
Slightly different take. It is not right to shoot at someone fleeing, but apparently the carjacking victim was not the one shot.
you also have the crazy lady at the Lowes-http://www.inquisitr.com/2478743/michigan-woman-shoots-at-shoplifter-woman-carrying-concealed-fires-at-shoplifter-in-home-depot-parking-lot/
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
