the guy at the bbq would also have to shoot across 6 lanes of traffic . no shot.
This is a discussion on Write up on Carson City IHOP within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; the guy at the bbq would also have to shoot across 6 lanes of traffic . no shot....
the guy at the bbq would also have to shoot across 6 lanes of traffic . no shot.
I have eaten at that IHOP. Even before seeing the google Earth photo I figured the armed man at the BBQ probably made the right choice. He may lose sleep imagining what he might have been able to do, but his family is no doubt glad he didn't play hero. The people inside, with the exception of the Guardsmen and any felons, had the option to carry and defend themselves, and did not choose to do so. It was not the BBQ guy's job, and he might have been thought to be an accomplice if a LEO happened to be in the restaurant or passing by.
I practice at self-defense distances with a full-size 9mm. That's it. That's all we do in IDPA practice too. I dont see me taking 100 yard shots.
Would I do nothing? If their attention wasnt on me, I'd probably act (besides calling 911). I'd examine my surroundings and do what I could...close distance, distract, warn others out of the area...one doesnt even need a gun to at least try.
Fortune favors the bold.
Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.
The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)
I know that I could not make a 100 yard shot with a pistol, let alone a head shot. I would not even try. There are two reasons for this, one, as I understand the physical layout, there were innocents beyond the target. Second, I would not want to initiate an exchange of fire with a AK at 100 yards. I don't think more than 1% of the shooters out there, could make a 100 yard shot with a pistol, I know with my eyes, and given the fact that I am typically armed with a Kahr PM9 with one extra mag I could not.
In this situation, at best, I could expect to distract the shooter for a few seconds, and would expect being shot in the exchange. When it comes to inserting myself into a firefight I can avoid and taking a bullet for someone, I would certainly do this for my family and probably for my friends, but would not for people I do not know.
So what are my take-aways from this incident and Gabe's thought provoking argument? First, the odds are better that a fusillade of fire from many armed patrons in the restaurant (who were within more reasonable pistol range of the shooter) would more likely have had an impact on the final results than that the average shooter learn to shoot with a pistol at 100 yards. Pushing for more armed citizens who can carry in a broader range of venues seems more easily and realistically accomplished than increasing the number of shooters who can make the shot at 100 yards. My second take away is a reminder to myself what I give up when I carry the Kahr as my EDC as opposed to my full sized HK or M&P. (not that I could have made the shot with a full sized pistol either) I still do not think it will cause me to change my daily carry, but it does bring home the trade off of gearing up for an encounter with one or two robbers at 21 feet and finding yourself in a gunfight with an active shooter armed with a long gun
Yes, Gabe's postings do give rise to some thoughts.
In the end, I would regret not having been able to do anything. But that's a whole lot different than choosing not to do something when I could, and regretting that.
Re: the portion I highlighted in red:
I do think that those of us who see reason in carrying a weapon, should gently try to persuade friends and family to get a permit, get training, and carry as often as possible. While violent crime appears to be going down, we all certainly seem to be seeing more of it, closer to home, every day.
The cops are not able to be there to protect us all the time, and so a weapon is as sensible an item to carry as a cellular phone. Especially now, when the economy is so tight that new officers are being furloughed on graduation from the academy, and experienced officers are being laid off because of nationwide budget constraints.
It could be worse!
As Gabe said....good discussion here. I'll be going to warrior talk after I get done with court this afternoon
Gabe, your points are right on about the monday quarterbacking. Too many times people get slammed for talking about the persons involved, actions taken or not taken, etc. Sometimes people are running their mouths and shouldn't be, but most of the time its a learning tool so that we can all learn from mistakes, learn from what went right, and hopefully be better prepared for the next one. We do it all the time at our department, in roll call training, firearms quals, and academy.
Lima....good points in your post. I'll only add that I as a LEO do think its my responsibility to do my sworn duty to do what I can and what I'm able to do to save lives in a situation such as this. I know what you're saying and I totally agree with the point of its not the gov't responsibility, but to me personally I got a job to do whether on or off duty.
I've taken 100 yd shots with my Glock 17 and 30 at the range hitting 2'x3' steel plates.
IF I was in a situation where it was clear to do so, and was absolutely necessary I would take that shot.
The IF, clear, and absolutely necessary need to be noted and emphasized.
On a side note, If this scenario unfolded and I was able, my AR would be coming out of the truck cause that 100yd shot is no problem.
We practice active shooter scenarios and have a week long force on force class for it. Its no cake walk. I hope I never have to engage in one, but I'm confident in my equipment, mindset, and skills to do it. I know all the guys on the street here are ready at the drop of a hat to take care of business and help anyone in this situation.
That being said, the best scenario would be for more people to have the equipment, skills, and mindset to take care of business when evil comes calling.
Not everyone out there is going to be able to do whats needed every time, and that's hard to deal with. I for one will not bad mouth the BBQ shop owner one bit. What I will bad mouth is our gov't for not allowing our military to carry, especially when they are in uniform as it just paints a huge target on their backs. Shame on this gov't and this policy.
Certified Glock Armorer
"I got a touch of hangover bureaucrat, don't push me"
Independence is declared; it must be maintained. Sam Houston-3/2/1836
If loose gun laws are good for criminals why do criminals support gun control?
I find this thread very welcome indeed. I am participating in one on another forum that was more optimistic than I thought it would be, but went through a spate of postings with reasons why the shot should not or could not be attempted (other than simple skill-set deposits). I tried counter-arguments and examples and have challenged them there to get what they need to have at least a basic ability to make the shot even if the situation dictates otherwise, but I am discouraged that anyone will take it up. I have also challenged myself to make sure I can make the shot, that I have at least the baseline skill to do so so that I won't be restricted if something like this happens near me at some time. If I'm going to not try, I don't want it to be because I don't think I can make it physically or technically; there needs to be some other reason. I believe right now I can make the shot under some conditions, but not others, and have set myself to expand the 'good to go' area as best and as much as I can. I still have to make some baseline shooting tests and set the criteria and standards for progress, but that's not a big deal; I expect to have that all done when I get back to the range in ten days or so.
If someone here will take up this challenge with me, I would be pleased to start a new thread and post my results and pictures so that my progress, or lack of it, will be on display and so I will be accountable. Are there some of you who would join me in a 50-100 yard shooting-capability-building challenge like this?
I did some 50 and 100 yard shooting yesterday. This thread got me thinking if I could make the shot with my EDC which is my S&W 457 .45. I was lucky to hit a man size target 1 out of 8 shots at 100 yards. At 50 it was much better all the shots hit the target, however, if the BG was wearing body armor, Im dead at 50 yards. At 25 yards Im pretty sure I could win this fight, but Im not sure if the BG would have still been outside for me to take the shot. I believe in being an asset to society, so I would have acted, but Im not sure given the details, that I would of been able to make a difference.
Don"t let stupid be your skill set....
While I am quite confident that I can hit a human target at 100 yards, at the range, with the target not moving or turning, not shooting at me or anyone else, and with no plate glass window full of non-targets as a backstop. Add in even one of the variables mentioned and the hit rate is cut at least in half. Add in all but the last one and the rate is now 1 in 10. Add in the last item and the shot will not be attempted, and I don't care who you are and how much training you have had lobbing bullets 100 yards at a moving target under that kind of stress with innocents as the reward for misses it is irresponsible and possibly criminal (if you take out a few diners) to take that shot with a pistol. add in the fact that you will be shooting at a person walking across the front of the building. Now you are shooting at the side of the person (half of the target size) and you can spray misses into a larger area of the restaurant. Maybe with my 12 inch barrel hunting pistol with a 4 power scope, but I have not seen a CC rig for it yet. Nope not going to happen.
I went out yesterday and tried to hit an 8x11 piece of paper at 100 yards.
There was a stiff wind and I used a duffel bag for a rest.
1911 was first. Nope, couldn't hit it. I wasn't even close. If the paper would've been the BG's head, a couple might have hit in the lower abdomen/hip area.
Glock 23 wasn't much of an improvement. I could definitely see that the .40 had less drop than the .45.
There is no way that I could make that shot, currently.
In the few seconds, or fractions thereof, one has to decide to shoot against so many variables at that distance. Bystanders, backdrop, wind, moving target, etc.
Trust in God and keep your powder dry
"A heavily armed citizenry is not about overthrowing the government; it is about preventing the government from overthrowing liberty. A people stripped of their right of self defense is defenseless against their own government." -source
A Nation of Cowards
If you have not read this 1993 essay or read it lately, it is timeless, and thought provoking in the vein of this discussion.
I can make a 100 yard shot with a 1911. I do it all the time. Heck, I make 200 yard shots most of the time. Would I do it with an IHOP behind the target rather than a big old berm? Nope. I can make that shot but not every single time, and a miss here will kill someone. That said, I keep a rifle in the Jeep. If I owned a BBQ I would keep a rifle in there as well. 100 yards with a rifle? No problem I can make that shot every time. If your state allows you to keep a long gun in the car I think it is a really good idea. Will you need it? I doubt it, but if you do need a rifle, only a rifle will do.
So, that begs the questions. Would you take the 100 yard shot? Would you attempt to close first? What would you do?
I think that, while some have said they and others routinely take such shots on the range with handguns, and would engage the madman... Those of us who do practice frequently and know our limitations and would not risk further innocent life by attempting a shot that was quite likely to be unsucessful at the least and deadly to the innocent at the worst.
Those questions asked and the statements made; the article is really quite good, and I do appreciate the link to it... I had not seen it before.
It could be worse!
The other night I got called in to fill in for a Deputy that hurt himself. It was a Friday night, a night that can be pretty busy at times. I had the 11PM to 7AM shift, and as luck would have it, things were very quiet. One never can tell how its going to be, you can get on shift and hit the ground running and not have enough time to eat, or you can be fighting to stay awake.
Around 2AM, as most LEO's in this county do, we met up at out local IHOP. Its one of three resturaunts in the county that stay open 24 hours, the other two being Waffle Houses.
This exact subject came up. There was a total of 5 of us there, myself, 3 county Deputies, and another officer from another small city in the county. As it was quiet for everyone, we took our time eating and discussing.
We talked about how we would respond, if called, what we would/could do if we were in the place eating when some guy walks up with an AK, and how we would deal with it.
It was agreed by all that bringing a handgun to a rifle fight in never a good thing, but fact of the matter is, most combat of any sort hardly ever happens to seem to be with ideal conditions, so one must act with what he has.
As officers, we do not really have the abilty to "opt out" as armed citizens do. We must engage until the threat is neutralized. Whether it be with a handgun, a rifle, a shotgun or sitting at a table and attempting to bounce a glass of milk off of the head of the shooter, we'll do whatever it takes.
We talked about a lot that night and the various scenarios. We all agreed that had we been off duty, we would have acted with whatever we had. Its one of the reasons that I advocate carrying a full sized gun, because the threat is never just a tiny one, when your life or someone elses is threatened, its a full sized threat. Yes, I know that lots here will only carry a .22, ora .32 or a .380 and write volumes about how good it serves them, but I cannot imagine taking on an rifle armed assailant with a small handgun.
We also agreed that if you had to engage a man from afar, that even if you could not hit the target, just keeping him occupied might save some lives until backup arrived.
In an active shooter scenario, when someone is firing and killing people, to say that you wont shoot because you might miss the target and hit an inncocent bystander is to ignore the greater harm. Letting someone indiscriminatly shoot while being armed just seems wrong to me. Yeah...I've heard every excuse that a human being can come up with for justifing their inactions,every legal argument, every moral argument every reason for not doing something.
The world is getting crazier by the day. People are going off the deep end for various reasons and I'm willing to bet it will only get worse. These shootings are happening more often, and there is no safe terrritory, it can happen anywhere.
Maybe, just maybe, as concealed weapons holders if we engaged shooters that were hell bent on destruction, and we killed them before they really got started, the rest of the phsyco's that would do such things would have second thoughts about going out in public with AK's or AR's or shotguns and shooting the easy targets.
Yeah, I know that its a stretch of the imagination to think that someone like an armed civilian would man up and eliminate the threat, but we have to start somewhere.
I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.
AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
See post #49: Pushing for more armed citizens who can carry in a broader range of venues seems more easily and realistically accomplished than increasing the number of shooters who can make the shot at 100 yards.
See post your post # 50: In the end, I would regret not having been able to do anything. But that's a whole lot different than choosing not to do something when I could, and regretting that.
When those 2 comments are combined, the essay is revelant to the discussion. I was not being critical of the BBQ owner, just trying to stimulate thought for readers who may not have been exposed to Mr. Snyders excellent presentation of this perspective. Perhaps some of his thoughts could be used when talking to others who are ambivalent.
For example, I go to breakfast with a realtor and retired dentist who obtained their CC license within the last couple of years. The realtor carries regularly, the dentist tries to second guess the risk factor and has become ambivalent. Part of his problem is he knows I always carry and thinks he can depend on others to handle whatever the situation requires. In view of the IHOP discussion we had ( and he was not carrying) I commented I would be willing risk going down WITH him, but not FOR him. He got a rather somber look on his face.
Glad you enjoyed the read - trust others will also.
Last edited by Paladin3840; September 26th, 2011 at 10:14 AM.