General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFor all those that say more guns is the answer, here is a reminder of the Tucson massacre:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41018893/ns/slate_com/t/armed-giffords-hero-nearly-shot-wrong-man/#.UA6-erQfT-0"I came out of that store, I clicked the safety off, and I was ready," he explained on Fox and Friends. "I had my hand on my gun. I had it in my jacket pocket here. And I came around the corner like this." Zamudio demonstrated how his shooting hand was wrapped around the weapon, poised to draw and fire. As he rounded the corner, he saw a man holding a gun. "And that's who I at first thought was the shooter," Zamudio recalled. "I told him to 'Drop it, drop it!'"
But the man with the gun wasn't the shooter. He had wrested the gun away from the shooter. "Had you shot that guy, it would have been a big, fat mess," the interviewer pointed out.
Zamudio had released his safety and was poised to fire when he saw what he thought was the killer still holding his weapon. Zamudio had a split second to decide whether to shoot. He was sufficiently convinced of the killer's identity to shove the man into a wall. But Zamudio didn't use his gun. That's how close he came to killing an innocent man. He was, as he acknowledges, "very lucky."
------------------
If he decided to shoot, there would have been at least one more innocent person killed in Tucson that day.
Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)But situations like this are chaos. More armed people? More chaos.
jillan
(39,451 posts)Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)And the guy in the interview had incredible presence of mind given the situation. I really doubt most people would respond even that well. They'd either be shooting wildly or -- preferably -- down on the ground crapping themselves.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)Why exactally should I worry that a CCW holder correctly identified the situation and didn't draw?
jillan
(39,451 posts)He had clicked the safety off and
one reason why Zamudio didn't pull out his own weapon was that "he didn't want to be confused as a second gunman."
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)He understood the risk of pulling his weapon and didn't. Anything else is Monday morning quarterbacking.
ileus
(15,396 posts)Chorophyll
(5,179 posts)Lionessa
(3,894 posts)And though drawn and ready, he also didn't fire before speaking and announcing his (and his gun's) presence. You seem to think he got lucky because he didn't fire. Not the case, he didn't fire because he did it exactly correctly.
NewMoonTherian
(883 posts)But it doesn't invalidate the times when civilians with guns have successfully stopped violent attacks. It doesn't happen every time, and there are huge risks. You could have also cited the recent story of the man who shot at robbers in self-defense, and accidentally shot a clerk. It still doesn't mean that nobody has ever successfully used a gun to save innocent lives.
What this does make clear is a lesson taught even in the most basic hunter safety classes: Be certain of your target, and what is beyond it. You have to overcome adrenaline and act in a safe and responsible manner in order to save lives, rather than further endangering them.
justanidea
(291 posts)He did the EXACT same thing a police officer would have done. Be ready, and assess the situation.
Actually he probably did better since some police officers wouldnt have given him a chance to drop his gun. They likely would have just opened fire.
So why is this story constantly repeated? If he did things exactly how police are trained??
jillan
(39,451 posts)as the shooter.
Why is that so hard to understand?