Why Was No One Armed & Shooting Back In El Paso WalMart ?

[AzogtheDefiler]

Apparently, most there were illegal aliens and assorted fat slobs on welfare.

So wrong but made me laugh out loud. Yikes

 

[LilOlLady]

Armed with an assault rifle, your best bet is to run. You do not have time to fight back when you hear the gunshots. Good guy with the guns can only take him down after the shooting. The bullets travel faster than sound. The shooter never announces he is about to shoot.

He announces it when he starts shooting. And when that shooting goes on for a full minute or more, there is time to stop him before he shoots more people, and thereby SAVE LIVES.

AK 47 is powerful gun but it (the one used) still is only a semiautomatic, and no greater rapid fire than an ordinary semiautomatic handgun. Best bet is to shoot the shooter, if you have the chance. You can even come up from behind him, and shoot him in the back. He may never even see you.

A shooter is going to make sure there is no one behind him. No one has ever had the chance to shoot a shooter and there is a reason. Because you never see him coming. He has the plan, you don't. In a public arena, there is no way to stop someone who wants to do what this shooter did. No amount of security. He is going to shoot someone before he is shot

 

[2aguy]

Armed with an assault rifle, your best bet is to run. You do not have time to fight back when you hear the gunshots. Good guy with the guns can only take him down after the shooting. The bullets travel faster than sound. The shooter never announces he is about to shoot.

He announces it when he starts shooting. And when that shooting goes on for a full minute or more, there is time to stop him before he shoots more people, and thereby SAVE LIVES.

AK 47 is powerful gun but it (the one used) still is only a semiautomatic, and no greater rapid fire than an ordinary semiautomatic handgun. Best bet is to shoot the shooter, if you have the chance. You can even come up from behind him, and shoot him in the back. He may never even see you.

A shooter is going to make sure there is no one behind him. No one has ever had the chance to shoot a shooter and there is a reason. Because you never see him coming. He has the plan, you don't. In a public arena, there is no way to stop someone who wants to do what this shooter did. No amount of security. He is going to shoot someone before he is shot

You don't know what you are talking about....you are making assumptions based on your opinion, not actual facts or actual mass public shootings...

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.

 

[skye]

The El Paso Walmart shooter killed 20 people (so far) and wounded 26 more. He may well have fired some shots missing people also. It's pretty fair to say this nut fired at least 50 shots, and very possibly well more than that.

It takes quite some time to fire that many shots individually, as this guy did, walking aisle to aisle, through the store. If there had been an armed security guard, or any armed citizen with a CCW license, this guy could have (and should have) been stopped cold after the first 2 or 3 shots.

As someone who has a CCW license, and is armed 99% of the time, when I'm walking around outside, it is amazing to me that there could have been that many people walking around unarmed and defenseless. Why? Don't they know something like this could happen at any time ?

In contrast, in 2002, a Muslim terrorist (Hesham Mohamed Hadayet) walked into Los Angeles Airport (LAX) armed with 2 handguns, plus magazines loaded with dozens of bullets. He shot and killed 2 people, and wounded 4. The airport was filled with people. The terrorist was shot dead right on the spot, by a security guard who was armed and ready to deal. Without that good guy with a gun, the airport would have been a bloodbath, just like this WalMart, and probably even worse.

This ARMED DEFENSE is what should have been the case in El Paso. How this guy could pull off what he did without getting shot, by a guard or CCW carrying citizen is mind boggling.

2002 Los Angeles International Airport shooting - Wikipedia

I agree. ^^^

Why nobody was armed? we ARE talking Texas here are we not? so yes,that's odd.

But then there re many odd issues about this shooting.

Issues like

quote:


" 1) If there’s only one shooter, why did so many eyewitnesses report multiple shooters at the scene?

2) Why did the local police arrest and hold three suspects in custody, as was widely reported by the media before the story was changed to a “lone shooter?”

3) Why does the so-called “manifesto” appear to be written by someone far older than 21 years of age? (Answer: The manifesto is a hoax. It was not written by the individual who was arrested as the shooter.)

and this one

4) How does one man kill 20 people and wound another 30 people with a single magazine that only holds 30 rounds? The surveillance photo shows no chest rig, no battle belt and no spare magazines.


ONE MORE QUESTION: Why was the shooter’s online profile changed from “Democrat” to Republican / Trump supporter? "-



I tell ya' .....something is rotten in El Paso.

 

[LilOlLady]

Apparently, most there were illegal aliens and assorted fat slobs on welfare.

So wrong but made me laugh out loud. Yikes

Three of the 20 people killed as Mexican nationals.

 

[bodecea]

What’s really disgusting is the left is actually happy this happened and will use it to score political points. As if any laws would have prevented this from happening.

If the guy wanted to shoot as many Mexicans as possible to stop Texas from turning blue, he certainly picked a very poor strategy.

Seems to me that he is just a psycho and it’s too bad someone didn’t off him.

Who on the Left has expressed happiness over this or the Dayton massacre happening? Name them for us.

 

[bodecea]

The El Paso Walmart shooter killed 20 people (so far) and wounded 26 more. He may well have fired some shots missing people also. It's pretty fair to say this nut fired at least 50 shots, and very possibly well more than that.

It takes quite some time to fire that many shots individually, as this guy did, walking aisle to aisle, through the store. If there had been an armed security guard, or any armed citizen with a CCW license, this guy could have (and should have) been stopped cold after the first 2 or 3 shots.

As someone who has a CCW license, and is armed 99% of the time, when I'm walking around outside, it is amazing to me that there could have been that many people walking around unarmed and defenseless. Why? Don't they know something like this could happen at any time ?

In contrast, in 2002, a Muslim terrorist (Hesham Mohamed Hadayet) walked into Los Angeles Airport (LAX) armed with 2 handguns, plus magazines loaded with dozens of bullets. He shot and killed 2 people, and wounded 4. The airport was filled with people. The terrorist was shot dead right on the spot, by a security guard who was armed and ready to deal. Without that good guy with a gun, the airport would have been a bloodbath, just like this WalMart, and probably even worse.

This ARMED DEFENSE is what should have been the case in El Paso. How this guy could pull off what he did without getting shot, by a guard or CCW carrying citizen is mind boggling.

2002 Los Angeles International Airport shooting - Wikipedia

Because the Democrats took the guns and or are scaring legal gun owners away

In Texas?

 

[2aguy]

What’s really disgusting is the left is actually happy this happened and will use it to score political points. As if any laws would have prevented this from happening.

If the guy wanted to shoot as many Mexicans as possible to stop Texas from turning blue, he certainly picked a very poor strategy.

Seems to me that he is just a psycho and it’s too bad someone didn’t off him.

Who on the Left has expressed happiness over this or the Dayton massacre happening? Name them for us.

Each one of the democrat Presidential Candidates.......they were high fiving each other in their campaign offices...

 

[bodecea]

The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, as determined by the courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court – including the meaning of ‘shall not be infringed.’

Firearm regulatory measures that are consistent with Second Amendment case law – measures which have not been invalidated by the Supreme Court – do not ‘infringe’ on the Second Amendment right.

For example, the courts have consistently held that AWBs are indeed Constitutional, the Supreme Court having never struck down an AWB.

Moreover, a military style weapon (or assault weapon) is defined solely by lawmaking bodies, elected officials determine what weapons will be subject to regulation, they alone have that authority.

What gun manufacturers might consider to be a military style weapon (or assault weapon), or what the military might consider to be a military style weapon (or assault weapon), or what private citizens might consider to be military style weapon (or assault weapon) is legally irrelevant, having no bearing on the regulation of such firearms.

So what you are saying is that the government decides what type of weapons law abiding citizens are allowed to have, which is exactly the opposite of the intention of 2A.

They decide how many wives or husbands you can have. They decide how much you pay in taxes. They decide where you can and can't travel to. They decide which drugs it's legal or illegal for you to use.

Exactly. People have handed over so many freedoms already to bitch about having another right regulated.

Yeah...where were all those gun bearing citizens when the Patriot Act was passed?

 

[bodecea]

if a Trump Supporter wearing a red hat had shot the shooter, i wonder how he would of been treated by cnn/msnbc

Yeah...but that didn't happen.............................................did it?

 

[2aguy]

if a Trump Supporter wearing a red hat had shot the shooter, i wonder how he would of been treated by cnn/msnbc

Yeah...but that didn't happen.............................................did it?

No, a racist, environmental extremist shot up the Walmart.....

 

[bodecea]

The El Paso Walmart shooter killed 20 people (so far) and wounded 26 more. He may well have fired some shots missing people also. It's pretty fair to say this nut fired at least 50 shots, and very possibly well more than that.

It takes quite some time to fire that many shots individually, as this guy did, walking aisle to aisle, through the store. If there had been an armed security guard, or any armed citizen with a CCW license, this guy could have (and should have) been stopped cold after the first 2 or 3 shots.

As someone who has a CCW license, and is armed 99% of the time, when I'm walking around outside, it is amazing to me that there could have been that many people walking around unarmed and defenseless. Why? Don't they know something like this could happen at any time ?

In contrast, in 2002, a Muslim terrorist (Hesham Mohamed Hadayet) walked into Los Angeles Airport (LAX) armed with 2 handguns, plus magazines loaded with dozens of bullets. He shot and killed 2 people, and wounded 4. The airport was filled with people. The terrorist was shot dead right on the spot, by a security guard who was armed and ready to deal. Without that good guy with a gun, the airport would have been a bloodbath, just like this WalMart, and probably even worse.

This ARMED DEFENSE is what should have been the case in El Paso. How this guy could pull off what he did without getting shot, by a guard or CCW carrying citizen is mind boggling.

2002 Los Angeles International Airport shooting - Wikipedia

Another person in the store shooting is not the answer. There have been 266 mass shootings in the USA this year. When are Americans going to say ENOUGH!!!?

I agree enough is enough; time to start deporting Democrats; the environment they've created is toxic.

Fuck you. It is your ilk that refuses to do anything about providing easy access to assault type weapons. The NRA has your party in their pocket.

Then Trump is out there spewing hate. Lying how these immigrants are filth, murderers, rapists, invaders . It is Trump that is riling up your clan of uneducated, ignorant people.

Blood is on your hands, asshole.

How many white Trumpers armed with assault type rifles killing people will it take before you realize what a fucking dick you are?

Nah, fuck you, you low life commie pedophile loving piece of shit. Your left wing 'culture war' hate fests create this sort of thing, and then you scum try and deflect fro your own sicko roles in it. You pieces of filth need to be deported somewhere you'll be happy, like the Sudan, or Somalia, ASAP.

I cannot help but wonder if posts such as that one should be flagged for concern....pretty twisted.

 

[bodecea]

The El Paso Walmart shooter killed 20 people (so far) and wounded 26 more. He may well have fired some shots missing people also. It's pretty fair to say this nut fired at least 50 shots, and very possibly well more than that.

It takes quite some time to fire that many shots individually, as this guy did, walking aisle to aisle, through the store. If there had been an armed security guard, or any armed citizen with a CCW license, this guy could have (and should have) been stopped cold after the first 2 or 3 shots.

As someone who has a CCW license, and is armed 99% of the time, when I'm walking around outside, it is amazing to me that there could have been that many people walking around unarmed and defenseless. Why? Don't they know something like this could happen at any time ?

In contrast, in 2002, a Muslim terrorist (Hesham Mohamed Hadayet) walked into Los Angeles Airport (LAX) armed with 2 handguns, plus magazines loaded with dozens of bullets. He shot and killed 2 people, and wounded 4. The airport was filled with people. The terrorist was shot dead right on the spot, by a security guard who was armed and ready to deal. Without that good guy with a gun, the airport would have been a bloodbath, just like this WalMart, and probably even worse.

This ARMED DEFENSE is what should have been the case in El Paso. How this guy could pull off what he did without getting shot, by a guard or CCW carrying citizen is mind boggling.

2002 Los Angeles International Airport shooting - Wikipedia

Even more shocking to me, on a very personal level as a man, an amazing woman's significant other, a son, a big brother, an uncle and a currently serving member of the armed forces, is the failure of every last adult human victim or bystander to do nothing more than at the very least charge the gunman and physically fuck his day up or at least try to be a human meat shield to protect others. I'll just go ahead and state the obvious—what no one else seems to be talking about; that which is on everyone else's mind: why didn't someone do something, anything to stop this fucker so other people could survive, get away, still be breathing. You know, it's almost like this incident was prearranged; almost like all these people were lured into being victims or set up to be easy kills.

Whenever I personally go to my local Wal Mart or the Mall, from the moment I park and we're heading for the store entrance, I am scanning other shoppers, store roofs, cover, wood/tree lines, whatever, for potential danger or threats to my lady and myself. Same goes for when shopping inside the store or eating in a restaurant. In short, I am always prepared to defend my lady or ambush an ambusher. Does no one else think this way? Have most modern "men" become such bleating, pacified sheep they'd rather flee danger than stand and defend all they love and care about in this world? WTF?

Because...it's not the movies.

 

[Brain357]

How do you know no one was armed?

Read the title of the thread. It doesn't say no one was armed. It says "No one Was Armed AND SHOOTING BACK" Get it ?

You think maybe because it was a bad idea to shoot back in a situation with people running all over like that?

Actually, just pointing a gun at some of these guys gets them to stop.....

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.

I see your link is to a gun site. Can you link to the FBI site and show they actually share your claim? Or is this like your false CDC claim. I think it is.

 

[bodecea]

Nah, fuck you, you low life commie pedophile loving piece of shit. Your left wing 'culture war' hate fests create this sort of thing, and then you scum try and deflect fro your own sicko roles in it. You pieces of filth need to be deported somewhere you'll be happy, like the Sudan, or Somalia, ASAP.

Next election voters need to remember which party is letting people into America from shit hole countries.

I'm guessing next election, we'll be paying attention to who is getting money from the NRA.

 

[2aguy]

How do you know no one was armed?

Read the title of the thread. It doesn't say no one was armed. It says "No one Was Armed AND SHOOTING BACK" Get it ?

You think maybe because it was a bad idea to shoot back in a situation with people running all over like that?

Actually, just pointing a gun at some of these guys gets them to stop.....

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.

I see your link is to a gun site. Can you link to the FBI site and show they actually share your claim? Or is this like your false CDC claim. I think it is.

They studied the mass shootings you asshat......

You know, just saying something is false because it tells the truth is the weakest form of argument.....since you are a weak minded troll, that isn't a surprise....that you are indeed an asshat moron, is also not a surprise.

 

[2aguy]

Nah, fuck you, you low life commie pedophile loving piece of shit. Your left wing 'culture war' hate fests create this sort of thing, and then you scum try and deflect fro your own sicko roles in it. You pieces of filth need to be deported somewhere you'll be happy, like the Sudan, or Somalia, ASAP.

Next election voters need to remember which party is letting people into America from shit hole countries.

I'm guessing next election, we'll be paying attention to who is getting money from the NRA.

You should have paid attention to hilary getting 145 million dollars from putin......

 

[Brain357]

How do you know no one was armed?

Read the title of the thread. It doesn't say no one was armed. It says "No one Was Armed AND SHOOTING BACK" Get it ?

You think maybe because it was a bad idea to shoot back in a situation with people running all over like that?

Actually, just pointing a gun at some of these guys gets them to stop.....

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.

I see your link is to a gun site. Can you link to the FBI site and show they actually share your claim? Or is this like your false CDC claim. I think it is.

They studied the mass shootings you asshat......

You know, just saying something is false because it tells the truth is the weakest form of argument.....since you are a weak minded troll, that isn't a surprise....that you are indeed an asshat moron, is also not a surprise.

So pro gun loons make up a study and you make it look like it is the FBI. Shocking. Are you ever not lying?

 

[2aguy]

Read the title of the thread. It doesn't say no one was armed. It says "No one Was Armed AND SHOOTING BACK" Get it ?

You think maybe because it was a bad idea to shoot back in a situation with people running all over like that?

Actually, just pointing a gun at some of these guys gets them to stop.....

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.

I see your link is to a gun site. Can you link to the FBI site and show they actually share your claim? Or is this like your false CDC claim. I think it is.

They studied the mass shootings you asshat......

You know, just saying something is false because it tells the truth is the weakest form of argument.....since you are a weak minded troll, that isn't a surprise....that you are indeed an asshat moron, is also not a surprise.

So pro gun loons make up a study and you make it look like it is the FBI. Shocking. Are you ever not lying?

Who made it look like the FBI, you moron.......I posted the link and the research.......does it ever make you tired being such a moron all the time?

 

[bodecea]

Should I engage in a shoot out with that guy with an AK-47 or should I exit that door?

First you secure yourself in COVER. Then you start peppering the assailant with shots at a distance of less than 20 feet. When he's lying on the floor dead, you'll need not worry about exiting. (or thinking about being a coward)

John Wayne-itis.