Nebraska Shooting - What The Hell Happened

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Mountainman, Dec 6, 2007.

  1. hartage

    hartage Monkey+++

    You mean the same kind of positive thinking that teenaged males use ? The I-am-invincible thinking that often gets them in trouble ? Most people when they grow out of that when they look back are surprised how stupid it was to think that way.

    Drugged out people on LSD sometimes think the same way. Think they can fly and actually believe it so they jump off roofs. The power of positive thinking has it's place. But it will not change the laws of physics and bullets will still puncture you. Blood will still leak out no matter how many happy thoughts you have.

    With a .22 you possibly could be a good enough shot to hit a grizzly bear in the eyes and blind him. Think that all you want. The most likely scenario would be you just end up pissing it off even more just before it tears you a new one.

    Terrorists think they will get 72 virgins if they blow themselves up. So the power of thought is pretty powerful. I have pretty positive thinking but it's safe to say it's not THAT positive.
  2. ozarkgoatman

    ozarkgoatman Resident goat herder

    Would I go after a grizzly with a .22, no and thats not what I'm saying. But if I was put in that situation then the only thing that would through my mind is that I am going to win one way or another.

    If you defeat yourself mentally your physical defeat is sure to follow.

  3. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    This Thread has taken on the consistency of runny calf scours..
    Why would it be any "MORE LIKELY you would not be on rthe same level" ??? In fact if you spend and extra 1minutes putting finger and nose prints on the window glass at Victoria's Secret,you may very well 50%(?) be on the same level at the time of the shooting...

    MrMurphy and I are old friends. in this case his appearance may very well mean I'm 15 ft away from numb nuts and my sidearm is home in the gun locker and I have to distract him with flying bars from "bath and bodyworks";Not that, I'm in the kill zone. This has gotten stupid.[gone]you slammed goatman for "useless positive thinking; thinking you are going to be in the worst posible position is just as groundless.
    And I don't`see shooting anybody as a gift presented by the gods.the gift is he's not in my living room at 2a.m.
    I've got enough to do without civil court dates.
  4. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    I believe that it all depends upon the variable factors in play. Most malls this time of year are packed. If you were close enough to bring it into play undetected with masses of people around, then by all means you could take him out with a pistol. I would imagine that a concealed carry holder armed, with any situation awareness would seek cover, see the threat, then if he could be taken out would attempt to do so. The priority is getting your loved ones to safety, that has to be priority #1. If people are running and screaming and he is front of you and you have the opportunity, yes I can see where it could be mission accomplished. I don't like taking a pistol to a rifle fight, but desperate times call for desperate measures. It all comes down to being able to think clearly in times of extremem duress, and being able to use sound tactics.

    You have to keep in mind the primary reason for the lack of success in the Hollywood Bank Shootout, and the Tyler Courthouse Shootout (in which I was two blocks away when it happened, use the search for details of the killings)was that the killer was wearing numerous layers of body armor. God bless Mark Alan Wilson, when he started shooting Arroyo with his .45, Wilson had no idea that Arroyo was wearing numerous layers of body armor. Neither did the numerous L.E. officers that were recieving and taking fire. When the autopsy on Arroyo was conducted, he was found to have taken 150 hits. Yes, I thought that would have been impossible. With a high level body armor, and a flak jacket over it, he was like hamburger meat, but the level of testosterone and no telling what pouring through his body enabled him to empty mag after mag, and take those hits. Mark Wilson hit him repeatedly center mass with his .45. Arroyo turned around, shot Wilson, then executed him with the coup de grace'. Wilson saved the life of Arroyo's son, but it cost him his own. Arroyo was killed by an officer with an AR after the car chase. If he wasn't wearing armor, he would have been killed by Wilson or the LE officers that were firing at him from the courthouse. I have not read that the 19 yr. old in the mall was wearing anything but his clothes. Two to the chest and one to the head. Body armor changes everything.
  5. ColtCarbine

    ColtCarbine The Plumber Founding Member

    agreed, gotta run [gone]
  6. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Playing a video game is far from actually shooting, unless you have actually used the hi-tech video simulations like the military uses. I love first person shooters, and have conquered more of the games than I care to count, but using a game pad, or a plastic pistol, is not anywhere near the same thing as a military simulation. I can see where the run of the mill 1st person shooter might aid in target acquisition, it will not prepare him for the act of shooting. As crowded as the typical mall is this time of year, a blind retard could shoot unaimed shots and kill 8 people. 7.62x39 will penetrate through numerous bodies. I wonder just how many of those kills/injuries were from over penetration?

  7. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    The only way I could see engaging someone on high ground with superior firepower would be if you were on high ground with the tactical advantage of surpise. Would I think that straight in that extreme fog of war? Who knows. I would probably end up doing what I could, and at least distracting him by taking the odd pot shot at him to keep his head down and his mind of shooting others. Even if you can keep him busy while the [patr]arrives, you have succeded. Most of the time when I think about engaging a shooter like this, it is going to be in extreme CQB. Not half way across the mall. But within the same store, or within easy pistol range.
  8. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    I do my best to stay out of them, but the last time I was in one during the Christmas season, I could have killed 10 by throwing a bowling ball. It wouldn't have taken any real skill for this kid to kill 8, just a few pull of the triggers. 7.62x39 penetrates well, over and over through body after body.
  9. Clyde

    Clyde Jet Set Tourer Administrator Founding Member

    Another thread bites the dust....[troll]
  10. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Amen brother! It's not the weapon of choice, but it is better than the scoped .300 Win. Mag. I left at home.
  11. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    I think what we can all agree upon is that without all of the information we don't know what we would have done. If he was five feet away with his back turned and he pulls out a SKS/AK and leans over the balcony in front of him and starts targeting and shooting shoppers, who among us would not have pulled out our concealed weapon and shot the bastard in the back? Then again, if he was half way across the mall and an exit was in front of us would we turn around and start zig-zagging from cover to cover looking to engage an assailant with superior firepower from an elevated position? Probably not unless our life depended upon it, or unless he was shooting at our family/friends. There are too many variables to cover.
  12. hartage

    hartage Monkey+++

    I just looked it up. Wilson managed to get to arroyo unseen. Mainly because arroyo was already in a firefight with LE so his attention was on them. Notice LE could not even get close to him and they were taking hits. The discussion was a single shooter with a rifle and a single attacker with a pistol. Having multiple attackers with pistols is quite different from a single attacker with a pistol. In the case with the 19yo there were no others. Had you engaged him with a pistol you would have been completely alone.
  13. hartage

    hartage Monkey+++

    What I mean as a "gift" was being in an ideal position to engage the 19yo. There are far more less ideal positions than ideal positions. Odds are when things happen you will NOT be in an ideal position and would have to get to one. Mr. Murphy sucks but he is more the norm than the exception.
  14. hartage

    hartage Monkey+++

    Going to have to severely disagree with you. One of the issues with WWII was troops not shooting at the enemy because it was taking a life. That was traced to troops shooting at bullseye targets to practice. They were never acclimated to shooting at people. The simple change of reference from "shoot the target" to "shoot the bad guy" was one of the changes made. Another change was the target itself instead of a bullseye was changed to a silhouette of a person. Just those changes eliminated the hesitation to shoot at humans.

    Video games are far more than that and far more effective in getting rid of the hesitation to pull the trigger when aiming at a human.
  15. hartage

    hartage Monkey+++

    Bingo. Then you understand that without the ideal conditions (rare) on your side it is suicidal to engage a rifle with a pistol.
  16. Nailbender

    Nailbender Monkey+++

  17. hartage

    hartage Monkey+++

    Exactly, which means you have to distill the discussion to averages and likelyhoods. It still stands that taking on a rifle with a pistol is suicidal in anything less than an ideal situation. The vast majority of the time you will just be cut down.

    It is easy for people to play arm-chair-rambo and think they can do this or do that. It is a completely different story in the real world. The reality of positioning, stability of the shooting platform, exposure to fire, etc does not care what anybody thinks.

    It is foolhardy to take on a 19yo kid with an AK-47 with a deathwish. He has every advantage including not careing about going home again.

    Cops and swat will wait till they are massed before going in to confront anybody. More so when they know the badguy is armed with a high capacity rifle. They understand the realities of a firefight. They have been there, done that.

    Arroyo just went in blind not knowing anything about the situation. Despite what he thought he is not ever going home again.
  18. hartage

    hartage Monkey+++

    Sorry, have not been in any wars. My experience is limited to my swat friends and ipsc. For two years I have been going to IPSC competitions with them. During that time made a few friends (in sdpd swat) and have been invited and participated in their training excersizes. I've been to numerous cqb excersizes in facilities in temecula and El Cajon. This was before 9/11 when policy was lax enough for them to invite people on a casual basis. This is where I have had the most exposure to simunitions (their equiptment) training with them. I have been on both sides (entry team and barricaded). This is when most of my misconceptions about cqb have been set straight by them. They have been my mentors in helping me improve my ipsc performance.

    I have helped set up the training exercises for ventura pd swat and watched. (we have the indoor mockups) But their policy prevents any non pd person from actually participating despite my previous training with sdpd swat. Individualy they have come out to paintball with us.

    I'm not swat nor do I pretend to be. I have however through training with them been exposed to their experiences and knowledge of cqb. I have over 2 years of ipsc practice and competitions with my 1911. (this was how I met the sdpd swat guys) I have seen how my "skills" stack up against my LE contemporaries in ipsc settings (lead) and cqb using both simunitions and paintball. I know what I can and can't do.

    I have enough understanding and experience to understand how arm-chair-rambo bravado usually gets people killed. I understand the importance of going in well equiped and well prepared as a TEAM. Even then you still might not come home.

    Ok, I've laid it out on the table. Your turn Tango. What experiences or knowledge pool do you draw from ?
  19. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    There are many variables to calculate. It doesn't have to necessarily be the idea situation, but it does better the odds. He may be better armed, but he may know nothing of sound tactics. Give me two guys, a shooter with an SKS/AK with many targets and an unseen armed "trained" individual with a handgun, and I give the unseen trained individual with the handgun the advantage. The shooter does not know he is the prey, he is busy looking for targets of opportunity, not worrying about his six. While I would not choose to take a pistol to a rifle fight, and I am a big proponent of Clint Smith's "a pistol is just to work your way to a rifle" belief, a pistol in the hands of a trained individual can more than even the odds and end the fight. I do not automatically think it is suicide to go up against someone with a rifle, more information would have be provided about the environment and individuals in question since we are arm-chair quarterbacking the scenario.
  20. hartage

    hartage Monkey+++

    No argument here. I just can't stress the fact that if he does see you coming for whatever reason. *poof* All advantage is gone. If you can't end it before he swings that muzzle around there will be hell to pay.

    Condenced is this, I prefer not to risk my life on such a narrow set of circumstances that gives the pistol an advantage. Unless I am close and can end it quickly, I'm not about to challenge an AK with a pistol.

    The LE guys went back home Mr. Wilson did not. However well meaning he was and a hero that he is he took an unreasonable gamble and lost.
survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary