Important Links

Hock's Blog

Hock's Downloads

CQC-Facebook

Hock's Facebook

Hock's Seminars

Hock's Shopsite

Hock's Web Page


New Products

Combat Kicks VID

Critical Contact VID

Death Grip of Knife VID

Dominant/Counter VID

First Contact VID

Impact Weapons Book

Knife Book

The Other Hand VID


Lauric Enterprises, Inc.
1314 W. McDermott
Ste 106-811
Allen, TX 75013
972-390-1777

 

 

 


W. Hock Hochheim's

           Combat Centric

Talk Forum for Military, Police, Martial Artists and Aware Citizenry



Hock Hochheim's Combat Talk Forum

  • October 24, 2017, 03:35:34 AM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: looking for some stats re mass shootings  (Read 5328 times)

juszczec

  • Level 3
  • ****
  • Posts: 208
looking for some stats re mass shootings
« on: January 14, 2013, 06:19:58 AM »

Hi folks

There are all kinds of current/former LE/military on this forum, people who know about combat shooting.  I know NOTHING of the subject, so I'm looking to your expertise for some information.

I'm in another discussion forum and one of the members is convinced that a larger armed populace could have prevented mass shootings like Aurora, Colorado and Newton, Connecticut.  Its a trend I've noticed - owning a firearm suddenly makes the owner able to shoot in a high stress, tactical situation.

This runs completely counter to what Hock teaches/common sense.

I've seen plenty of empty hand skills go right to hell in stressful situations in the gym - read "in an environment where you do NOT run the risk of getting killed"

I say a greater untrained armed populace is going to increase the number of bystanders who get wounded or killed. 

Are there any statistics to back up one or the other position?  Have there been any mass shootings stopped by armed civilians with no additional training?  What experiences do any of the forum members have with civilian firearm owners stopping crimes like Aurora?  Do YOU believe a theater of armed people would have been able to stop the shooter or would they have increased the number of wounded/dead in the process? 

If I'm wrong, I want to know so I can at least speak knowing the facts.  But something isn't adding up in this argument.  Like I said, I know nothing about shooting (tactical or otherwise) and have only plinked away at a paper target once.  I'm looking to the experts here for guidance and education.

Mark

Hock

  • Administrator
  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 6372
    • www.HocksCQC.com
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2013, 09:36:54 AM »

Armed people frequently stop mulitiple or mass shooters. It does happen. But you have to live in an area where good numbers of people nearby are armed. Sitting here this morning I don't have those numbers in front of me...they are obtainable...

Hock

juszczec

  • Level 3
  • ****
  • Posts: 208
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2013, 09:55:12 AM »

Do you, or anyone reading, have any idea where I can look to get that info?  I've been reading a summary of

                    Guns and Violence: A Summary of the Field
                    by Gary Kleck
                    School of Criminology and Criminal Justice
                    Florida State University
                    Tallahassee, Florida 32312

at http://rkba.org/research/kleck/point-blank-summary

Unfortunately, he makes no statements about whether civilian firearm owners suddenly thrust into a mass shooter type situation would or would not kill the mass shooter's targets due to their unfamiliarity with combat shooting.

Also, do you, or anyone reading, know anything about Kleck's work?

Mark

Hock

  • Administrator
  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 6372
    • www.HocksCQC.com
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2013, 11:19:15 AM »

Of course, that comes from 1991, and really won't fully apply to the 2010s (it is off to type that - 2..0..1..0s)

It is very situational and there are many big and small factors involved with a citizen stepping up to scare, shoot at or shoot a bad guy.

Hock 

juszczec

  • Level 3
  • ****
  • Posts: 208
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2013, 11:29:12 AM »

Yeah, I got the feeling the study wasn't new but its the first thing I've read where the bias is not just oozing thru the screen.

What factors could have changed so its not applicable anymore?  I can't even guess.

GTC-554

  • Level 1
  • **
  • Posts: 32
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #5 on: February 27, 2013, 12:11:24 AM »

If there were cases of armed citizens shooting innocent bystanders, the antigun media would be all over it.
Logged
"The world is a dangerous place to live not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."
Albert Einstein



"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
Marcus Aurelius

JimH

  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 2020
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #6 on: February 28, 2013, 03:16:35 PM »

An armed populace are a group who might,if in the area of a shooting,have the on hand Potential to stop a shooter/shooters.
They are on hand.
If we are to depend upon a police department,most of those officers,though trained to shoot,have also NEVER been in a shooting incident and have not proven they would be able to deal with the threat.
Most departments know this and that is why,even though they all take fed money to train active shooting incidents,most departments must wait for SWAT,State Police and or Federal officials.(How many of them aside from training have actual active shooter,especially in schools or malls experience ?)
Everyone armed in an active shooter incident is capable of dealing with a threat and being that most police arrive after the shootings are over,an armed populace is the enxt best line of defense.
my opinion
« Last Edit: February 28, 2013, 03:19:00 PM by JimH »
Logged

Canuk

  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #7 on: February 28, 2013, 04:42:11 PM »

If we are to depend upon a police department,most of those officers,though trained to shoot,have also NEVER been in a shooting incident and have not proven they would be able to deal with the threat

This statement is probably the truest  and most honest statement that I have ever read  and hits the nail on the head be it shooting or offensive or defensive driving, everything is just training until you have done it. And then its different the next time you do it. Each time will always be different to the last.

Well said JimH
Logged

Fletch1

  • Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #8 on: February 28, 2013, 10:30:10 PM »

Hi folks

There are all kinds of current/former LE/military on this forum, people who know about combat shooting.  I know NOTHING of the subject, so I'm looking to your expertise for some information.

I'm in another discussion forum and one of the members is convinced that a larger armed populace could have prevented mass shootings like Aurora, Colorado and Newton, Connecticut.  Its a trend I've noticed - owning a firearm suddenly makes the owner able to shoot in a high stress, tactical situation.

This runs completely counter to what Hock teaches/common sense.

I've seen plenty of empty hand skills go right to hell in stressful situations in the gym - read "in an environment where you do NOT run the risk of getting killed"

I say a greater untrained armed populace is going to increase the number of bystanders who get wounded or killed. 

Are there any statistics to back up one or the other position?  Have there been any mass shootings stopped by armed civilians with no additional training?  What experiences do any of the forum members have with civilian firearm owners stopping crimes like Aurora?  Do YOU believe a theater of armed people would have been able to stop the shooter or would they have increased the number of wounded/dead in the process? 

If I'm wrong, I want to know so I can at least speak knowing the facts.  But something isn't adding up in this argument.  Like I said, I know nothing about shooting (tactical or otherwise) and have only plinked away at a paper target once.  I'm looking to the experts here for guidance and education.

Mark

Start here...

http://www.nypdshield.org/public/SiteFiles/documents/Activeshooter.pdf
Logged

Fletch1

  • Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #9 on: February 28, 2013, 10:51:10 PM »

An armed populace are a group who might,if in the area of a shooting,have the on hand Potential to stop a shooter/shooters.
They are on hand.
If we are to depend upon a police department,most of those officers,though trained to shoot,have also NEVER been in a shooting incident and have not proven they would be able to deal with the threat.

Except that they have training specifically on how to respond to such a situation as well as a variety of violent situations far beyond the average citizen.

Most departments know this and that is why,even though they all take fed money to train active shooting incidents,most departments must wait for SWAT,State Police and or Federal officials.(How many of them aside from training have actual active shooter,especially in schools or malls experience ?)

Not a fair statement. Although the media coverage would suggest otherwise, Mass or Active Shooter type incidents are statistically very rare, and even more so if you further filter by those that were resolved by armed confrontation with police... so holding out for a responder with "live experience" would be a long wait.

Everyone armed in an active shooter incident is capable of dealing with a threat and being that most police arrive after the shootings are over,an armed populace is the enxt best line of defense.
my opinion

Simply having "non gun" people carry guns would likely cause more problems than it would solve, IMHO. An armed and trained populace would be significantly better, especially if they were keenly aware of police response procedure.

I teach a class on Citizen Response to Active Shooter and try to address a number of different aspects that are typically ignored or avoided by FEMA and DHS, such as citizen armed carry. It is a dilemma for sure but can work with balance as long as people are aware that armed response involves more than a trip to the gun show.

Logged

Canuk

  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #10 on: March 01, 2013, 06:22:37 AM »

"An armed populace are a group who might,if in the area of a shooting,have the on hand Potential to stop a shooter/shooters.
    They are on hand.
    If we are to depend upon a police department,most of those officers,though trained to shoot,have also NEVER been in a shooting incident and have not proven they would be able to deal with the threat.

"Except that they have training specifically on how to respond to such a situation as well as a variety of violent situations far beyond the average citizen"

Police train to pass a course of fire, they are trained in use for force generalities, not specifics. Specialty teams  or units get special training. JimH stated a truth, many police officers have never been in a fire fight and you never know how you will handle a situation until such time you are in one
Logged

juszczec

  • Level 3
  • ****
  • Posts: 208
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #11 on: March 01, 2013, 06:49:54 AM »

Hi folks

There are all kinds of current/former LE/military on this forum, people who know about combat shooting.  I know NOTHING of the subject, so I'm looking to your expertise for some information.

I'm in another discussion forum and one of the members is convinced that a larger armed populace could have prevented mass shootings like Aurora, Colorado and Newton, Connecticut.  Its a trend I've noticed - owning a firearm suddenly makes the owner able to shoot in a high stress, tactical situation.

This runs completely counter to what Hock teaches/common sense.

I've seen plenty of empty hand skills go right to hell in stressful situations in the gym - read "in an environment where you do NOT run the risk of getting killed"

I say a greater untrained armed populace is going to increase the number of bystanders who get wounded or killed. 

Are there any statistics to back up one or the other position?  Have there been any mass shootings stopped by armed civilians with no additional training?  What experiences do any of the forum members have with civilian firearm owners stopping crimes like Aurora?  Do YOU believe a theater of armed people would have been able to stop the shooter or would they have increased the number of wounded/dead in the process? 

If I'm wrong, I want to know so I can at least speak knowing the facts.  But something isn't adding up in this argument.  Like I said, I know nothing about shooting (tactical or otherwise) and have only plinked away at a paper target once.  I'm looking to the experts here for guidance and education.

Mark

Start here...

http://www.nypdshield.org/public/SiteFiles/documents/Activeshooter.pdf

Wow.  Thanks.  That's EXACTLY what I'm looking for.

Fletch1

  • Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #12 on: March 01, 2013, 06:00:37 PM »

"An armed populace are a group who might,if in the area of a shooting,have the on hand Potential to stop a shooter/shooters.
    They are on hand.
    If we are to depend upon a police department,most of those officers,though trained to shoot,have also NEVER been in a shooting incident and have not proven they would be able to deal with the threat.

"Except that they have training specifically on how to respond to such a situation as well as a variety of violent situations far beyond the average citizen"

Police train to pass a course of fire, they are trained in use for force generalities, not specifics. Specialty teams  or units get special training. JimH stated a truth, many police officers have never been in a fire fight and you never know how you will handle a situation until such time you are in one

The problem is that you can't "prove" it without seeking out or stumbling into a gunfight, niether of which is an intelligent thing to do under normal circumstances. Compound that with the fact that many people (cops or otherwise) who survive armed confrontations, do so based upon mistakes made by the bad guy as opposed to their own skills and abilities. I maintain that... as much as people might want to dismiss the training and skill of the lowest performing police officer, on average they do have at least a passable level of skill and have been through scenario based training that deals with these types of threats.

Something to keep in mind... Virtually every agency that I am aware of has been doing some type of Active Shooter/ School Violence/ QUAD training at least since Columbine that involves first responding officers making rapid and hasty entry and seeking out and destroying the active threat long before the arrival of Specialized Units. What was once labled "Advanced Training" has now become mandatory to many front line officers, including small unit or single officer tactics with the long gun/ patrol rifle.

I am in the middle of this right now in my community.

I can't say that the police response is the only answer. But I also maintain that arming everyone would probably create more problems that it would solve. If you don't train with your firearm (not just attending a one time class), then I don't think you can reliably count on "guts" just because you have a .380 in your pocket. 

Crap! I just realized that I logged on with an old screen name from when I was having trouble with registration. Sorry about that, Hock. It's me, F. Fuller.  :-[
« Last Edit: March 02, 2013, 04:22:18 PM by Fletch1 »
Logged

JimH

  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 2020
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #13 on: March 03, 2013, 04:48:03 PM »

NYC Police Officers get some of the best training in the world.
How many of the 40,00 officers could run an active shooter scenario in Real Life ?
You would be surprised the numbers who are reluctant to do regular Runs with minimum to medium risk,no less a high risk of an active shooter scenario.
How many of the lowest Police Officers out there in the US actually train with a fire arm on their own time ?
Not many
How many actually shoot on a regular basis ?
Not many
How many only shoot to qualify and re qualify ?
Most
How many Police Officers across the US have Never Drawn ,no less never fired their weapon during their service ?
A Lot
How many have done their whole time on the job and never drawn their weapon and or have never been in any real shooting incidents ?
Many
How many ex/former/current Leo and or Military are out there who have had experiences in actual shooting incidents and who carry in public and would be more than capable of dealing in a shooting ?
A Lot.
How many who carry of their own choice,not of departmental choice, actually shoot on a regular basis ?
I bet more than Police Officers.

Here is video of NYPD shooting at an armed suspect in front of the empire state building:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wfGoXXl_Ns
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko4iXWyZg7A

The above shoot out took place on the street,in the day light,with police able to see and identify the shooter,(A shooter who had a gun jam),and they ,the Police were within 20 feet of the suspect when they opened fire.
Shooter never fired due to a malfunction Police eventually shot and killed the suspect while also wounding 9 other civilians in the street.

What would happen in that same scenario,in a crowded Mall or school,with limited lighting and a shooter able to take cover and perhaps mix closer with a civilian populace ??
Just because a person has a badge and a gun and some training does not mean they are prepared for that which they may encounter for real,a reality which is VERY different than that which they may have trained for.

Yes the well trained,not even the lowest trained, LEO are not always better than a civilian who is possibly trained and possibly more capable of dealing with an active shooter in a Mall or school.

We are not talking of arming all,but allowing those ,in schools as an example,who want to carry ,to train,qualify and be allowed to carry.

I used the NYPD clip to make a point.
I am sure I could find a lot more from various other deaprtments across the country.

My opinion.
Logged

Fletch1

  • Forum Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #14 on: March 03, 2013, 09:43:42 PM »

NYC Police Officers get some of the best training in the world.
How many of the 40,00 officers could run an active shooter scenario in Real Life ?
You would be surprised the numbers who are reluctant to do regular Runs with minimum to medium risk,no less a high risk of an active shooter scenario.
How many of the lowest Police Officers out there in the US actually train with a fire arm on their own time ?
Not many
How many actually shoot on a regular basis ?
Not many
How many only shoot to qualify and re qualify ?
Most
How many Police Officers across the US have Never Drawn ,no less never fired their weapon during their service ?
A Lot
How many have done their whole time on the job and never drawn their weapon and or have never been in any real shooting incidents ?
Many
How many ex/former/current Leo and or Military are out there who have had experiences in actual shooting incidents and who carry in public and would be more than capable of dealing in a shooting ?
A Lot.
How many who carry of their own choice,not of departmental choice, actually shoot on a regular basis ?
I bet more than Police Officers.

Here is video of NYPD shooting at an armed suspect in front of the empire state building:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wfGoXXl_Ns
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko4iXWyZg7A

The above shoot out took place on the street,in the day light,with police able to see and identify the shooter,(A shooter who had a gun jam),and they ,the Police were within 20 feet of the suspect when they opened fire.
Shooter never fired due to a malfunction Police eventually shot and killed the suspect while also wounding 9 other civilians in the street.

What would happen in that same scenario,in a crowded Mall or school,with limited lighting and a shooter able to take cover and perhaps mix closer with a civilian populace ??
Just because a person has a badge and a gun and some training does not mean they are prepared for that which they may encounter for real,a reality which is VERY different than that which they may have trained for.

Yes the well trained,not even the lowest trained, LEO are not always better than a civilian who is possibly trained and possibly more capable of dealing with an active shooter in a Mall or school.

We are not talking of arming all,but allowing those ,in schools as an example,who want to carry ,to train,qualify and be allowed to carry.

I used the NYPD clip to make a point.
I am sure I could find a lot more from various other deaprtments across the country.

My opinion.

Good points, all. And as I teach Active Shooter response, I am  keenly aware that some cops "have it" and some don't. My observations have been that, given a "trained course of action", a reasonably and realistically trained LEO would have an advantage over the average CCW holder if it came down to making an entry and confronting an active shooter.

Of course, it certainly depends on the LEO, the Shooter and a host of other factors. My statement is not intended to trivialize training and experience of a seriously trained, mentally prepared and motivated CCW citizen... or to recommend that the only course of action is to "wait for the cops". I know a lot of CCW holders and I know a lot of cops that I base my opinion on.

There are plenty of examples of cops not hitting what they are shooting at, sure. There are many more examples, I would think, of gang bangers and drive by shooters who have done the same or worse... with the experience of having done it many times before. Training is important. Experience is important. The best training should give the officer experience, even if it is just simulated... because that is the closest they may get to the real thing as a rehearsal.

Great points, JimH.
Logged

Canuk

  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #15 on: March 04, 2013, 08:05:38 AM »

There is no CCW in my area, no one gets to carry guns execept for cops and few security types. Active shooter training for signles and pairs is becoming more popular, along with patrol rifle's. This is a good thing. However those training on the rifle don't always sign them out, some dont carry a shotgun meaning that when the call comes in it's them and a pistol. Tactics and training count but lets not kid ourselves into thinking that police have better judgement and shooting skills than anyone else.

All training is just training until such time as it gets used in a real world environment. Some step up and some fall down
Logged

RevBodhi

  • Guest
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #16 on: March 05, 2013, 10:33:58 AM »

One of the biggest problems in this venue of operations relates to the raw human emotion that invades and distorts the reality, of which stats are used on both sides of the emotional argument to prove not much, really.  The complexity is immense, with no easy solution forthcoming by throwing money or more guns at the problem.

People who have lost touch with reality, and grasp their own inner torture, wanting to share this torment with others, will do just that.  Their actions involve surprise, horrific violence against the unprepared and unarmed, to which some die before the threat is even known to exist.  That's the nature of an ambush with firearms.  Even involving the well trained and experienced, in ambushing attacks, some are wounded and even die, before proper immediate actions are engaged.  The key is minimizing the damage as quickly as possible as we get out of the kill-zone (often involving our own delivery of surprising violence, accurately delivered).

There is not a government around the globe that can really prevent these kinds of attacks from ever happening--even under the most seriously controlled, fascist regimes.  Israel, one of the most armed, prepared and experienced nations on this planet still suffer from terror attacks that kill its citizens.

Preventative measures can be installed with passive and active protective devices that make it harder for souls to elicit these kinds of behaviors, but such measures work only to the degree the populace is willing to relegate personal freedoms away to the government, and the degree to which the assailants are willing to sacrifice themselves in the process.  Those less convicted may think twice from making attempt.

Well trained, experienced shooters on site, in multiple roving patrols, properly armed, with full-select fire carbines/long-guns can also minimize the damage done when such an active shooter unleashes death and mayhem.

Throwing guns at people, hoping they will rise the occasion, when under such dire duress they will simply default to what they know best, will offer more problems to the situation than is already occurring.

When gunfire starts erupting, and supersonic rounds are cracking the air at ear level, impacting all about and screaming of the dying fill the air, along with the smell, people not prepared or experienced in such contexts have a natural tendency to default to their instincts.  Even the trained who have never experienced horrific human violence before, but have made up in their mind they will prevail, will own a moment of hesitation from this kind of horror before they will be able to engage.

A real problems in this venue of dealing with active shooters are the people who have never been shot at, and who have never had to aggress upon and kill active threats, yet are always talking about what to do, how to do it and what needs done, as if they have first hand experience doing as much.

People who spend a life time training with their guns, and own guns, and believe guns will keep them safe, but who have never been involved, directly in killing combat, never tested for real, are often the most secure, confident, and the most ignorant of their methods of approach in this environment.  Wishful thinking and denial are serious operational errors that get people killed quickly.

This is a multifaceted problem that needs every avenue of approach addressed, the least effective being arming civilians, hoping they will help.

School buildings need to be built with security in mind.  Security equipment that visually monitors areas of access need installed; metal detectors with detailed scans and armed guards experienced at managing active shooters need to man these access points.  Roving patrols of heavily armed, experienced operators with full select fire weapons need to be placed in areas of high concentrations of people need in place--shopping malls, airports, train stations etc.

I have operated in regions of such as what I describe above, and I am personally okay with that, but, I am not sure if the general populace in the USA is ready for roving patrols of heavily armed guards of experienced operators walking in tandem down the halls of our shopping malls and outside government building and in our halls of elementary, secondary, and higher learning establishments.

My personal assessment in the USA is that there are already too many well meaning nut jobs armed to the teeth and loaded for bear who don't even know what a damn bear looks like, let alone can deal with an enraged Mama Grizzly barreling down on them to shoot--metaphorically speaking.  Banning guns or arming more people with guns, is not the answer.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2013, 10:58:24 AM by RevBodhi »
Logged

JimH

  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 2020
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #17 on: March 05, 2013, 03:29:02 PM »

Mass shootings done close up,(not from a sniper position, shooting and moving on),are done in areas that the shooter/s KNOW they will meet little or no resistance.
No one really goes to a police station and tries to kill a mass number of Police do they ?

Schools,Movie Theatres and Malls/Market places are the most targeted today ,in various places around the world.
Why ?
The ability of the shooter to get in and mix with the targets and then open fire ,plus the idea that they are not checked and they will meet MINIMUM resistance once they start firing as authorities round up to plan or run to call higher authority able to call in a force to act.

The Aurora movie theatre shooting took place at that movie theatre because others had checks and scans for weapons and when an emergency door was opened an alarm went off,(none of which happened ,or was done,at the movie theatre picked for the shooting)

Columbine was selected well in advance ,and the killings were planned with zero to little resistance at the start,which allowed the teens ability to lock/secure doors and plant bombs to slow down responders.

911 hijackers used airports with the least security checks.
They had tested several points before finding the ones that would allow them the ability to board with minimum chance of discovery and they used flights with minimum chance of encounetring Sky Marshals and zero chance of an armed passenger.

We do not need to arm those who do not want to be armed.
Just arm those who want to be armed that work in these places already,or hire armed people to work in these areas to CAUSE a NUT who thinks a mass killing will be easy to think twice.

Not every Soldier or Police Officer is a shooter or door kicker.
Hiring of Police Officers does not say that to be a LEO you must be willing to enter an active shooter scenario with you alone or you and your partner before more people arrive on scene.
People will take the training as it is NO Risk,but actually doing a real active shooter scene is a different story.
The military and police are no different than society,you have wolves,sheep dogs and Sheep.
Wolves being the shooters and door kickers>
Sheep dogs being those who will do the job ,but not want to risk life all the time.
Sheep those who want the title,uniform and badge yet who do not want to really do the job.

If we hire people to guard money and or valuable items ,why not allow schools to hire armed police /security to protect schools,Malls and Movie theatres.(are humans not of value ?)

My opinion
Logged

noload

  • Level 4
  • *****
  • Posts: 512
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #18 on: March 05, 2013, 09:43:20 PM »

Quote
Wolves being the shooters and door kickers>

Thanks Jim for saving the wolves, sheep dog and sheep saying with that phrase.
Logged

RevBodhi

  • Guest
Re: looking for some stats re mass shootings
« Reply #19 on: March 06, 2013, 05:56:22 AM »

JimH, you make a very important and valuable observation in your above, that the active shooter PLANS ahead and PICKS his targets well, to his advantage.  The active shooter may be a total nut job and insane, but he is not stupid. He may want to die or just not care, but he has done his preparations well.

Sometimes what is hard for law-abiding souls to engage is thinking as a demented killer would think, looking at our number one resource in this country--our children--as targets for the insane killer.

Now, seeing our children as vulnerable and real targets for those reared, conditioned, on a steady diet of glorified and sterilized violence (Hollywood, TV, Video Games) without experiencing any of the consequences (the guts, gore, smells, sounds, etc), how must we think so as to protect our living treasures for our future?

JimH offers a very solid assessment toward this end.  Nothing can be assumed or presumed, but properly prepared...no easy task, but essential if the real future resource--our children--are to be preserved.
Logged
 

Download