20/20 If I Had a Gun

[911pcars]

I suppose that show was just demonstrating the same mindset similar to what many people think about their driving skills. People rate their skill level higher than what it really is.

In this car forum, I'm sure everyone rates their driving skill above average - on par with Danica Patrick from the responses I read. With all respect to people who love drag racing, pointing a car on a straight path, then depressing the gas pedal for 8-12 seconds doesn't require the same skill level as negotiating an autocross or go-cart course at a competitive speed. I'm referring to average civilians, not pros.

Same with firing at a controlled gun range. That activity doesn't remotely approach or even reinforce the necessary reactions and mental judgement to handle a stressful situation.

... and, if you didn't watch the video, why guess? Comments are more credible after having viewed it, ya?

Sherwood

[pwd72s]

I watched the video, Sherwood...I still call BS...What I did not watch was the full show.

[nostatic]

Sherwood, depends on which segment you were talking about. I didn't watch the stress shooting bit, but I can imagine the outcome. It is well known that in combat soldiers have a much lower hit rate in combat than when on the range. But there still is a hit rate. To me the real argument is around guns as deterrent rather than as being a hero in a shoot out. A bad guy is going to be a lot less likely to go after someone who is armed. And if they know that person spends every week at the range? Do you think they want to roll those dice?

I watched the kids and guns segment and it was the usual histrionics. I've argued with an anti-gun friend about this. It is easy to set up guns as the cause of our violent ills. In reality we have a people problem, and as is the case with most anything in life, ignorance usually drives the problem. In the "wouldn't it be nice" basket we have a world without guns. And life would be safe and beautiful. Too bad that will never happen in our lifetime or my son's lifetime. So instead I choose to live in reality and train him accordingly. If he didn't like to shoot, I would have stopped at the gun safety information so at least if he runs across a weapon somewhere he knows what to expect and what to do. Knowledge is power and saves lives.

And I'm an excellent driver

[911pcars]

Originally Posted by pwd72s

I watched the video, Sherwood...I still call BS...What I did not watch was the full show.

Which part did you consider BS? Do you think the results were staged to reinforce a desired point of view?

Todd,
I agree that in some circumstances, citizens packing weapons may be a deterrent. However, I'm not sure I'd want to be in the same zip code if several joe publics (as demonstrated in the video) whip out their 17-round Glocks and begin blazing away at some real or imagined threat.

Sherwood

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by 911pcars

Todd,
I agree that in some circumstances, citizens packing weapons may be a deterrent. However, I'm not sure I'd want to be in the same zip code if several joe publics (as demonstrated in the video) whip out their 17-round Glocks and begin blazing away at some real or imagined threat.

Sherwood

I totally agree, and have argued that in the past. I'm not sure that I want to be the guy to "save the day" only to cause collateral damage. I think there should be significant training required for CCW. "Rights" include "responsibilities", and risk needs to be considered when determining who is able to carry and use a weapon in public.

[Endat]

i like this one better

[tyro]

Originally Posted by 911pcars

Same with firing at a controlled gun range. That activity doesn't remotely approach or even reinforce the necessary reactions and mental judgement to handle a stressful situation.

I agree. I think of my experiences hunting deer or pheasant. I've missed a shot plenty of times even when I had the perfect opportunity, gun in hand at the ready, target "in my sight". I cannot imagine trying to aim and successfully hit my target while being shot at.

I enjoyed the show for the most part, and was certainly intrigued by the 5 year old kids who had a revolver mixed in with their toys. Even after watching the stupid "eddie eagle" video from the NRA, they still get the gun out and point it at each other. I still can't believe the idiot trying to see if the gun was loaded by looking down the barrel, he should have shot himself right there.

[competentone]

Originally Posted by 911pcars

Which part did you consider BS? Do you think the results were staged to reinforce a desired point of view?

Todd,
I agree that in some circumstances, citizens packing weapons may be a deterrent. However, I'm not sure I'd want to be in the same zip code if several joe publics (as demonstrated in the video) whip out their 17-round Glocks and begin blazing away at some real or imagined threat.

I didn't see the whole program, just the clip of it posted here, but it would appear that the implication -- from the "demonstration" -- is that without "extreme training" a firearm is a "pretty useless" self-defense tool.

I would never suggest that a firearm alone is any type of "ultimate" defense tool, but the test in the video is completely bogus -- at least in respect to its suggestion that "guns on campus" would be useless.

As has already been pointed out, the "gunman" entered the room knowing to target the one person with the gun. This would not be the situation in a real "school shooting" scenario.

What if, like the situation seen in some of the real school shootings, gun shots and screams were heard outside the room first? The armed student would have had ample time to draw the carried firearm and keep it aimed at the door, ready to fire on the gunman if he entered the room.

Or what if the gunman entered and began ordering the others around without firing shots?

The "test" only demonstrates that if another person with a gun has "the drop" on you, your gun, holstered on your hip, isn't likely going to help.

Like, "Duh!"

Most of us who own and carry firearms for self-defense already know that!

The program (from what I see in the posted portion of it) does contain "truthful" information about how stress can affect one's performance (true whether with or without a firearm) in an extreme stress situation, but its "slant" is clearly "anti-gun."

[pwd72s]

Originally Posted by competentone

I didn't see the whole program, just the clip of it posted here, but it would appear that the implication -- from the "demonstration" -- is that without "extreme training" a firearm is a "pretty useless" self-defense tool.

I would never suggest that a firearm alone is any type of "ultimate" defense tool, but the test in the video is completely bogus -- at least in respect to its suggestion that "guns on campus" would be useless.

As has already been pointed out, the "gunman" entered the room knowing to target the one person with the gun. This would not be the situation in a real "school shooting" scenario.

What if, like the situation seen in some of the real school shootings, gun shots and screams were heard outside the room first? The armed student would have had ample time to draw the carried firearm and keep it aimed at the door, ready to fire on the gunman if he entered the roo

Or what if the gunman entered and began ordering the others around without firing shots?

The "test" only demonstrates that if another person with a gun has "the drop" on you, your gun, holstered on your hip, isn't likely going to help.

Like, "Duh!"

Most of us who own and carry firearms for self-defense already know that!

The program (from what I see in the posted portion of it) does contain "truthful" information about how stress can affect one's performance (true whether with or without a firearm) in an extreme stress situation, but its "slant" is clearly "anti-gun."

Beat me to it, thanks... It was so obvious that the clip was "staged", I'm surprised that Sherwood bothered to ask the question.

[Danimal16]

Read the book "Shooting to Live". Hand Gun Combat has almost nothing to do with aiming.

I would love ABC to put up the % misses for LEOs under stress. It is very high. I need to look that one up, but it is only double what the students hit rate was. As far as the training, it had nothing to do with practical employment of the weapon, only basic safety. What a bunch of crap.

[911pcars]

Originally Posted by pwd72s

Beat me to it, thanks... It was so obvious that the clip was "staged", I'm surprised that Sherwood bothered to ask the question.

Paul,
You misunderstand my earlier statement. I asked if you thought the results were staged, not if the setup was staged (of course it was). I'm not saying saying this one scenario is typical of the effectiveness of being armed. In the demonstration video, possession of a weapon didn't help. The test subjects still couldn't function, even after being tagged by paint bullets. One test, one result.

Under other circumstances, perhaps when there's more time to process and react, the results may be different. That scenario is more obvious than what was demonstrated and thus not addressed.

"As far as the training, it had nothing to do with practical employment of the weapon, only basic safety. What a bunch of crap. "

How many gun owners receive basic training in "practical employment" of weapons as opposed to basic safety and gun range experience? A distinct minority of gun owners I would guess. The basic thesis here is that carrying a weapon without specific training in stress situations can provide a false sense of security and with a potential degree of collateral damage to others. And what provides anyone with an inherent trust in a stranger who has a gun to do the right thing? Ask a police officer and see if they would feel comfortable teamed up with an unknown armed civilian in close quarters.

I see some benefit in the deterrent effect of arming citizens. However, it's not without its flaws.

Sherwood

[pwd72s]

Originally Posted by 911pcars

Paul,
You misunderstand my earlier statement. I asked if you thought the results were staged, not if the setup was staged (of course it was). I'm not saying saying this one scenario is typical of the effectiveness of being armed. In the demonstration video, possession of a weapon didn't help. The test subjects still couldn't function, even after being tagged by paint bullets. One test, one result.

Under other circumstances, perhaps when there's more time to process and react, the results may be different. That scenario is more obvious than what was demonstrated and thus not addressed.

"As far as the training, it had nothing to do with practical employment of the weapon, only basic safety. What a bunch of crap. "

How many gun owners receive basic training in "practical employment" of weapons as opposed to basic safety and gun range experience? A distinct minority of gun owners I would guess.

Sherwood

Possibly a minority, Sherwood...but there is nothing in the world to prevent you from enjoying ispc (USPA action pistol) competition through your local NRA affiliated gun club...as myself and many others have done and are doing.

That's what was so phoney baloney about the entire ABC show...it purposely selected ignorant "test subjects". Pretty much the same as handing the key to a new twin turbo and a 5th of whiskey to a 16 year old and telling him to "have fun".

[Mo_Gearhead]

There are many anecdotal (and documented) instances where citizens and "trained" shooters have been as close as the confines of a 15' X 20' room;
many shots fired by both shooters ...and ALL shots MISSED.

Think; Pulp Fiction, where the guy steps out of the bathroom and empties a six shot revolver and hits ... 'all wall'.

No matter how much one practices at the range, shooting paper or other targets,
as stated by others above, your attention/focus changes when you have a target that is returning fire!

Many will lose 'shooting discipline' very quickly. Instead of concentrating on their own sight alignment/sight picture ...they get caught up in observing their adversaries "movements". He's turning, contorting, hands moving, perhaps he's screaming at you ...you may tend to look into his face in an attempt to 'read' him,
etc. All of this distraction ...unless YOU are very disciplined, may cause you to lose your concentration of squeezing off well placed rounds.

I have never been a cop...but I have been in military combat.

Killing another individual sometimes makes good movie scenes ...and many an 'armchair warrior' probably wish for such encounters

... you should pray that you never have to do it in your life.

[pwd72s]

Originally Posted by Mo_Gearhead

There are many anecdotal (and documented) instances where citizens and "trained" shooters have been as close as the confines of a 15' X 20' room;
many shots fired by both shooters ...and ALL shots MISSED.

Think; Pulp Fiction, where the guy steps out of the bathroom and empties a six shot revolver and hits ... 'all wall'.

No matter how much one practices at the range, shooting paper or other targets,
as stated by others above, your attention/focus changes when you have a target that is returning fire!

Many will lose 'shooting discipline' very quickly. Instead of concentrating on their own sight alignment/sight picture ...they get caught up in observing their adversaries "movements". He's turning, contorting, hands moving, perhaps he's screaming at you ...you may tend to look into his face in an attempt to 'read' him,
etc. All of this distraction ...unless YOU are very disciplined, may cause you to lose your concentration of squeezing off well placed rounds.

I have never been a cop...but I have been in military combat.

Killing another individual sometimes makes good movie scenes ...and many an 'armchair warrior' probably wish for such encounters

... you should pray that you never have to do it in your life.

100% agreement with all of the above...especially the prayer part.

[Hawktel]

Its pretty simple on how to reduce gun crime.

1. Reduce Poverty. People with Car payments generally don't commit gun crimes.
2. Increase education. People with college degree's don't commit gun crimes as much.


But as always its the implementation that's the trick.

[varmint]

my one real self defense moment came pre dawn. i was sleepy and confused and my gun wasn't where i remembered leaving it.

luckily the meth head presented a real big easy target. if it had come to that i don't think there would have been any trouble hitting him.

[varmint]

my one real self defense moment came pre dawn. i was sleepy and confused and my gun wasn't where i remembered leaving it.

luckily the meth head presented a real big easy target. if it had come to that i don't think there would have been any trouble hitting him.

[cstreit]

There's damn little anyone can do about being suprised in a situation like that, sure. However the shooter knew exactly where the armed student was and went for them first. So they set the person up for failure, pulled on the heart strings, and put it all in an unrealistic situation.

I agree with the conclusion that education and training is important, but that seems to be the lesser of the lessons they were trying to push. Believe me there are plenty of people in this world that probably shouldn't own a gun, or drive a car, or own sharp scissors. ...but I'm not sure what they were really trying to say in all this.

[Racerbvd]

Originally Posted by nostatic

If you teach them this, then you don't get as much stupidity

When I was a kid, all my friends had BB guns, my dad wouldn't let me have one, but when I turned 12, he gave me a 12 gauge shot gun and I took a Fire Arms Safety Course and laid down the law on my gun. Best damn thing he could have done.

[Eric 951]

20/20 has been full of **** since they did the smear job on Audi 5000 and "unintended acceleration" which almost sank the company in the US at the time.