[grnzbra]

I just came across this thread on warriortalk.com that discusses the CCWer firing and having his gun jam due to lack of maintenance. Could this be the "other" shooter mentioned at the end of the article linked to the thread here?

If both threads are talking about the same guy, while the discussion points of everyone here are valid based on the info available, it does raise some serious questions.

 

[rocky]

link doesn't work.

 

[dpesec]

yep same one.

 

[grnzbra]

Why are we getting two radically different accounts? The one we've been discussing said that the CCWer didn't take the shot, and the story from Fahrnam says his gun jammed and that he was the only one shot up so badly (indicating that it is referring to the same CCWer, not the "other" possible CCWer)

 

[KC135]

Farnam's report is correct. Friend talked to one of the first officers on the scene and the story is the same.

 

[grnzbra]

Hmmmm. So what does that do the victim's story that he just couldn't shoot the kid in the head?

 

[Rob72]

Hmmmm. So what does that do the victim's story that he just couldn't shoot the kid in the head?

I guess that totally supports it, he couldn't!
Re, my original post, I'm not sure which scenario bothers me more, someone who goes the distance for CCW and "can't" when it's needed, or someone who would take such poor care of themselves (their tools)!

 

[Smith1911]

Something isn't jiving here. All of the articles I have read say he did not shoot, then again I did hear that he did and his CZ Jammed. I don't think they know what happened. He definitly could have handled things differently. That guy should have been the one down, instead of the CCW holder.

 

[P95Carry]

I am still a tad confused - but heck if the gun failed why was he not still holding a cover position - not to mention this maybe highlighting the use/need of a BUG.

I still need a definitive explanation of the whole deal... if such is available. The link was no good to me cos you need to register.

 

[rocky]

the gun jamming could be an excuse presented up by the CCW holder. In panic maybe he didn't release the safety or just thought he pulled the trigger. Panic and adrenaline can cause errors. (all this is just guessing) Hopefully we can get the right story and learn for mistakes made.

 

[Suarez Intl]

Gents,

We will be getting more and more info in the coming months I expect. We got into a very "spirited" discussion on what a CCW person should do in such cases. We got a variety of discussion points, with all making good sense.

I wrote an article on The ACtive Shooter Response for CCW in our student newsletter, and I include the link here for you to look at.

http://suarezinternational.com/ezine/warriornews-dec2005.html

Now the gent in Tacoma - we are not sure what he tried to do. But we must learn from this. Recently I taught a class in Texas and one of the students was a friend of the man who faced the rifle armed bad guy outside the courthouse in a city (can't remember the city..sorry) in that state. The bad guy killed the good guy in that one.

My student told me that the biggest lesson he'd learned from his brave friend was that onvce you begin shooting you do not stop until the adversary is down and no longer a threat. Apparently his friend only fired a couple of shots against the armored BG and was in turn shot when he stopped shooting.

In the Tacoma case the wounded good guy either fired and missed and was unable to fire again, or did not have the mental decission made to kill. In either case there are lessions to be learned here from making sure your gear works to mind set stuff.

I think it was Napoleon who said, "A wise man learns from the mistakes of others, rather than from his own mistakes".

Gabe Suarez
Suarez International
http://www.suarezinternational.com

 

[dpesec]

Hi Gabe,
True, you never stop fighting.
But in the Tyler Tx situtation, I think another thing can be learned. In this case, a headshot is required. Perhaps a second thing too never bring a pistol to a rifle fight. This is the lesson from the North Hollywood BoA shootout.
I don't think a .45 could have done much damage to a person with a flak vest plus Level II armor

 

[Moon]

According to a mod at this site (12th post down on page 1) claims to have talked first-hand to a cop who said the rusty CZ was the shooters, not the CCW's.

http://www.stoppingpower.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=10169

I think the CCW citizen has also admitted he could have shot the shooter in the back, but either verbally challenged him, or hesitated or both (and obviously paid dearly for that mistake).

That IMO is one of the worst things Hollywood does... aside from the "shoot him in the leg" crap, they make it seem unfair or immoral to shoot someone in the back when real life simply does not work that way.

 

[KBHeiner7]

Hi Gabe,
I don't think a .45 could have done much damage to a person with a flak vest plus Level II armor

That all depends on where you shoot 'em.

The officers were doing what they were trained to do - shoot COM, but after rocking those perps a few times and not stopping them, I'd start shooting for the ol' brain-bucket.

 

[XD40]

Update on Tacoma Mall Shooting Suspect.
Seems he didn't intend to hurt anyone:
(From the Seattle Times, Dec 9)
One assault charge was upgraded to attempted murder based on a statement from the most seriously injured victim, Dan McKown, who was shot and partially paralyzed. McKown said Maldonado committed a "very cold-blooded attack," according to court papers.

That comment and other information from McKown could help justify the attempted-murder charge by showing Maldonado arrived at the mall with killing on his mind, prosecutors said.

However, Maldonado's defense attorney said his client never meant to hurt anyone.

"He didn't go to the mall to shoot anybody. He didn't go to the mall to rob a bank. He didn't go there to take hostages. He went there ostensibly to make a statement," Sverre Staurset said.

In addition to firing an assault rifle and a machine pistol, wounding seven people, Maldonado is accused of taking several people hostage and holding them for hours before surrendering to police.
______________________
I know I always carry a rifle when I am trying to make a statement.

 

[P95Carry]

Thx for update XD -

"He didn't go to the mall to shoot anybody. He didn't go to the mall to rob a bank. He didn't go there to take hostages. He went there ostensibly to make a statement," Sverre Staurset said

WTH!!!!!!! Sorry folks but here I am, not smoking anything illegal - not doped up meds or drugs - and yet I find my head shaking side to side in amazement.

I apologize to real and respectable attornies but hey - this defence is right out of fairy land - isn't it??

''Statement'' - well come on - so by that token we can, anyone of us - go on a rampage in a public place - armed - and make our ''statement'' by shooting folks.

''Didn't mean to hurt anyone'' - geez - sorry guys - I am dumbfounded when I read utter crap like that - and hey - if any jury can buy that defence then truly, the justice system has gone right down the 4" pipe.

IMo the guy needs fried - sorry!! Sane or insane - no more oxygen for him thank you.

 

[Rob72]

That comment and other information from McKown could help justify the attempted-murder charge by showing Maldonado arrived at the mall with killing on his mind, prosecutors said.

So he (Maldonado)will have the opportunity to do it again. Carrying for "defense" means that if you use it, you won't have to use it against the same assailant twice. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions....and the blood of fools.