Write up on Carson City IHOP
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; I think too much is being made of the "AK vs Handgun" argument. AK's are generally more accurate than the gun press and forums like ...
October 1st, 2011 07:43 AM
I think too much is being made of the "AK vs Handgun" argument. AK's are generally more accurate than the gun press and forums like to admit. But there is no guarantee that the shooter has the training or ability to hit with the rifle at 100 yds any better than you can with your handgun.
Don't automatically think "30-round rifle = I'm dead".
The LCP, no.
My G26 or LCP, neither one is good for that shot.
But I carry a G26 regularly and have made 100yd shots with it often. The gun is capable of the same accuracy as it's larger brothers.
October 1st, 2011 10:12 AM
I would much rather have you shooting at me from 100 yards with your 26 than to have me shooting at me from 100 yards with an AK.
Originally Posted by ScottM
October 1st, 2011 12:55 PM
Thanks for the well wishes all, I don't mean to side track the thread but that little "Whoa, what was that?" moment radically changed my basic premise on how I would conduct myself under many circumstances. (BTW I had a nice overnight at local hospital and no indication of any damage done) But before that moment my assumed response was one thing if I had disabled family members with me, and something different if I was out by myself. Now until I get cleared by the cardiologist what might have been previously viewed as a "hands on" situation has an entirely new aspect to it. If further testing shows I need some work done, my force continuum is greatly abreviated until everything is fixed.
One of the thoughts I had, trying to keep relevant to this thread, is that depending on ones medical condition standing your ground against an active shooter like this could potentially be less of a risk (strange as that may seem) than trying to get out of the area. I think everyone should really take a hard look at not just their shooting abilities, but their ability to safely withdraw from hostile contact under various circumstances. If you are in the IHOP can you physically go out a window to get away from this guy? In a mall type scenario are you up to getting out the doors or is your best bet to find a planter or a bench for cover and stand your ground? If you are in the parking lot is running away from him more of a risk to you than running towards him? I am not exactly a small target. If I am caught in a gap between two clusters of cars in that lot I think I would have a better chance moving toward him so I could see what he is doing and looking at than turning my back to him.
Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis
October 1st, 2011 02:34 PM
That may be true, but I wouldn't take the shot with a 19, 17, or 34 either. Is there a chance the shot can be made with a G26? Yes. Can it be made on the first shot with the certainty that is required in this instance under the conditions that existed when Ralph made his decision? Not by anybody I know. A shot like that is far from the sure thing it needs to be with the restaurant windows right behind the target, cross traffic between the shooter and the target (cars with innocent bystanders in them), and the possibility of innocent bystanders in the lot that could be hit by ricochets, etc.
Originally Posted by ScottM
If varmint hunting has taught me anything, it is that there is a huge difference between shooting at a target at a known distance (shooting range) and identifying and hitting a moving target an unknown distance away in a field under stressful circumstances with the first shot. In this case the pistol shooter is bringing a handgun to a 100 yard rifle fight.
100 yards is well within the point blank range for a 7.62x39 AK with iron sights shooting at a human torso.
The other thing that we are assuming is that the guy in Ralph's poistion 100yards away from the bad guy knows what will happen next and is able to take that into consideration when evaluating the risk of taking the shot. the fact is he doesn't know what the guy is going to do next. Ralph sees the guy shoot the lady in the parking lot but other than the guy is willing to shoot that lady, he doesn't know anything else. For example the shooter could have finished his mission when he shot the motorcycle lady, so as far as Ralph would know he's done and on his way out of Dodge (Ralph isn't threatened, shouldn't take the shot). It isn't till Ralph sees him heading for the restaurant that he had the data to figure out (probably takes a couple of seconds) that's where he is going next. At that point the shooter is in motion, maybe even running, and time left to respond isn't more than a few seconds before the shooter is inside. Not a lot of time to recognize the situation, get a clear shot (see the target), account for traffic (cars driving by in front of Ralph have innocent bystanders in them), other folks in the parking lot, what's behind the target, get the gun out, accurately estimate the distance (not easy), and get off the shot of a life time at a moving target. That's a tough shot in anybodys book.
YMMV of course.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety), by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” by H. L. Mencken
October 1st, 2011 05:14 PM
The point wasn't what you can do with an AK or I can do with my G26.
Originally Posted by Mike1956
Was the shooter competent enough to actually hit someone who was shooting at him from 100 with his rifle?
It works both ways ya' know...
October 1st, 2011 05:55 PM
Underestimating your opponent is never a good idea IMO.
Originally Posted by ScottM
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)
October 1st, 2011 07:43 PM
Play your cards, take your chances, I guess. I don't make trump on nines and tens.
Originally Posted by ScottM
October 2nd, 2011 01:54 AM
I won't say I would have done this or would have done that because I can't say with any certainty what I would have been capable of doing in the IHOP situation but... I can say with absolute certainty that I would have done something to try to stop the shooter. Successful or not, I would have tried. That I know from past experiences I have had.
"Greater love has no man than this, that he lay down his life for a friend." That's just how this old bird is wired!
ALWAYS carry! - NEVER tell!
"A superior Operator is best defined as someone who uses his superior
judgement to keep himself out of situations that would require a display of his
October 2nd, 2011 03:15 AM
Well said Thumper! I got your back.
October 2nd, 2011 02:42 PM
A few of you have really hit on one of the key components to "the decision." It really comes down to confidence. BBQ man knew he did not have the skill sets to deal with this situation.......just like the vast majority of CCW holders. We need to deal with the reality that the vast majority of gun owners do not have the training, the skills, and the confidence to step up to the plate in a situation like this.
The major component to "the decision" is the question "can I help make this situation better or is it likely that I will do more harm than good?"
Only the individual can answer that question and that is about as personal a decision as can possibly be made. If you have never had to answer that question or had to deal with the consequences of answering that question, then "uncertainty" is going to be as big as the Montana sky.
For those that have answered the question, have dealt with the consequences of answering the question, and have trained their rear ends off for the next time they have to answer that question, then "uncertainty" is not an issue at all.
If this is a situation that you know that you will never get involved in, then carry your gun and shoot it every once in a while. But if you know yourself to be somebody that will not be able to keep from "running to the sound of gunfire" then you better get your act together and train for that day. If not "uncertainty" could lead you to a life full of regret.
When my wife read this article, she looked at me and said "I know you would go in, and if you died I would be sad.......but I know you would go in and that is what I would expect from you."
I've studied the art of killing for 12 years now to try to understand why I always found myself inside of the fight. For those like some of you and I, it really is as plain as this.......
"It's who we are......it's what we do!"
It's not for everyone......and that's cool, because the bottom line is no matter what decision you make.......it could be the wrong one.
"Murphey is a ruthless b*****d!"
October 2nd, 2011 07:32 PM
Nor do those who are able want to train to attain those skills, I believe.
Originally Posted by Sweatnbullets
They would rather train for the 'average' gunfight at the 'average' distance with the 'average' number of rounds fired.
I can tell you that I am 49 and have never been in a gun fight. So I don't know what 'average' may be, when and if my fight ever comes.
And truthfully, neither do they.
It may be an in-your-face fight, it may be from a further distance. Heck, it may even be a classic draw and shoot at 7 yards just like many practice on the square range (doubtful, though).
Since I don't know what fight I may face, I want to try to be as well-rounded as possible. If that means rolling around and getting dirty doing H2H or knife; or shooting handguns out to 100+ yds.
I don't train to be 'average'. It is very possible that the life of my family (or my own) may depend on it.
October 2nd, 2011 07:46 PM
Very good post Roger, for me you said a lot in it.
ScottM I think you are so right, because we know not what our fight will be when it comes we need to train in many fields to best best ability to be as ready as we can for anything and everything that comes our way.
We need to train so we know our ability not just think we can or can't. If you have done it on the range or in class you own (yes or no)
It's gotta be who you are, not a hobby. reinman45
"Is this persons bad behavior worth me having to kill them over?" Guantes
October 13th, 2011 11:55 AM
This is old news by now, and I'm bringing back a dead thread. Sorry, but I just found it and had to say something. I'm a year into my second 5-year term as a CHL holder in Texas. Reading this thread, I see two prevailing notions. One is that incidents like this are becoming more common. That may be true, or it could just be that they get better news coverage.
The second theme I pick up here is the Zorro image. Coming to the rescue and being a big public hero. Not likely. From my own reading, I think incidents of armed citizen shooters getting into trouble for trying to help, vastly outnumber the crazed shooter events. Read anything by Ayoob, Farnam, or others, and you'll read real horror stories of CCW holders trying to help, and for their efforts, they expend their life savings defending criminal charges or civil suits. Even LEOs get charged and sued all the time, but they fortunately have city or union attorneys to defend them. You and me?
To an expert witness in your trial: "Officer, what would you say are the odds of someone shooting a handgun 100 yards across a parking lot and hitting the attacker, rather than hitting and killing the plaintiff's pregnant wife or some other innocent bystander?" "Oh an experienced LEO could make that shot about one time in five. A typical private citizen, about one in fifty." "Would you say that it was reckless and careless of the defendant to try and make that shot across a crowded and busy parking lot at someone in front of a glass front restaurant?" And so on. For your gallant effort, you are poor. Your savings, your house, your car. All gone--and that's if you win! (Remember, it didn't cost the plaintiff a nickel to sue, even if he loses, thanks to contingent legal fees.) The worse case is all that expense plus a judgement that assures that you remain poor for the rest of your life. Of course your reputation, as the idiot civilian who shot across a parking lot and killed a pregnant woman, assures that you also can't find a job.
No sir. You come after me or my family, and I'll do anything to stop you. Otherwise, different story. Like Tom Gresham said on his radio program the week after the IHOP shootings to a caller who criticized the BBQ guy (I paraphrase), "The people in the IHOP had the same opportunity to have a CCW gun as the guy in the BBQ restaurant. It was their responsibility to take care of themselves." And he is exactly correct. How many of those people made the decision, "I'm not going to carry a gun. That's insane. That's why we have police." We need to have the same mindset: "My intervention would be insane. That's why we have police."
"If I were the Devil, I'd take from those who have and give to those who wanted until I had killed the incentive of the ambitious."-Paul Harvey, 1964
October 13th, 2011 02:44 PM
See, the only thing that can throw a monkey wrench into this is the fact that open carry is legal in my state. I open carry my handgun, and have seen others do the same. However, I have never seen somebody open carry a long gun, though it does happen on occasion. It could turn out very poorly if one were to shoot somebody who was merely open carrying.
Originally Posted by smolck
My take on this type of situation: I will defend myself and by default those immediately around me. I don't run towards a gun fight, especially one involving me going up against a rifle. There is a fine line between being brave and being suicidal.
October 13th, 2011 06:57 PM
Evidently, we don't hang around the same LEO's.
"Oh an experienced LEO could make that shot about one time in five. A typical private citizen, about one in fifty."
I've seen many an 'experienced' LEO barely qualify at 25 yds and in. A 'typical' private citizen probably wouldn't even have their gun with them. It would be in the car 'just in case'. Or at home.
But the people who would even consider intervening have training much better than LE, paid for out of pocket because they want to attain a higher standard. 'Qualification' isn't training, it's just shooting at targets under time. Same for IDPA.
I'm not 'anti-cop' by any means. I have family and close friends who do the job.
We need to have the same mindset: "My intervention would be insane. That's why we have police."
But LE is very seldom on-the-scene when any crime happens. They merely tape off the area and outline where the bodies are afterward in the majority of crimes, take reports, then investigate.
Personally, if my wife (who actually carries a pistol herself) and son were in the IHOP I'd want someone to try to intervene.
Search tags for this page
carson city ihop shooting
conceal carry witness to ihop shooting
defensive carry forum
ihop assessment toole
ihop shooter wearing body armor
ihop shooting ccw holders
warriortalk forum gabe suarez ihop shooting
Click on a term to search for related topics.