Bang!

[dReWpY]

What next?

Your in a soft target and you hear a gun shot, what do you do?

[RACER X]

sorry about the size, lol

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-65QG0AnUdTc/TctYw3jlmkI/AAAAAAAAAqs/EVoMl73t8cg/s1600/black-superman.jpg

[EpyonXero]

What next?

Your in a soft target and you hear a gun shot, what do you do?

Call the police.

[dReWpY]

And then....

[CasterTroy]

Crouch, reach in my waistband and pocket (XDm/surefire)

I'm no superhero though....and I can't talk a big game. I could never accurately speak of what would ACTUALLY come next. But if with my family:

Priority 1 would be getting them to a secure location
Priority 2 would be calling the police
Priority 3 would be assessing the situation to see if I could prevent any losses

Beyond that, I couldn't TELL you what I'd do, but it wouldn't be "go down without a fight"

[pauldun170]

sorry about the size, lol

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-65QG0AnUdTc/TctYw3jlmkI/AAAAAAAAAqs/EVoMl73t8cg/s1600/black-superman.jpg

:lol

by "size" Ed is referring to Superman's "package"

[pauldun170]

What next?

Your in a soft target and you hear a gun shot, what do you do?

D.A.R.B.

duck...
assess the situation
rise
break out into song

[Homeslice]

soft target? :scratch:

[dReWpY]

School, church, etc.

[Twobanger]

By soft target do you mean "Gun free zones" and other non permissive areas where you're a sitting duck for a madman?

[OneSickPsycho]

Take cover... determine where it's coming from... get the fuck out of there.

[Rangerscott]

Put on my wizard hat.

[Adeptus_Minor]

Take cover... determine where it's coming from... get the fuck out of there.

This.
Since I don't currently carry and I have no h-t-h skill, that's all I can do.
If possible I'd try to help others get out as well.

[Papa_Complex]

Take cover... determine where it's coming from... get the fuck out of there.

I've had the opportunity to think about this for a long time, since a kid shot up a local school back when I was in grade 5 (the incident that caused the biggest change in our gun laws, in 100 years). This is the only reasonable answer.

[Turbo Ghost]

I'm waiting on my carry permit right now and intend to be armed. In a general public area, get the hell out of the way! IF it's possible to help then, do. In a situation like the school tragedy, I don't think there's any way I could NOT try to stop the shooter! ONE of those children's lives is worth way more than mine will ever be. That being said, no one truly knows what they will do in those situations except those who have already been there like our military and police and even then, each situation creates its' own response.

[OneSickPsycho]

http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html

the part of the story we aren't hearing...

[Twobanger]

http://policelink.monster.com/training/articles/9782-active-shooter-reality-check

[azoomm]

http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2012/12/17/cowards-mass-murders-and-the-american-public/

[Switch]

That's right, let's just shoot our way out of problems.

[jtemple]

That's right, let's just shoot our way out of problems.

Do you have a better idea?

[Papa_Complex]

Do you have a better idea?

A functional mental health system and reasonable restrictions on gun ownership? Just spit-balling here.

[azoomm]

A functional mental health system and reasonable restrictions on gun ownership? Just spit-balling here.

Would need to fix the insurance acceptance of mental illness as "real" first. It just sucks that our society has gotten to this point.

It has taken us decades to fuck things up. There is no single fix for this.

[goof2]

I've had the opportunity to think about this for a long time, since a kid shot up a local school back when I was in grade 5 (the incident that caused the biggest change in our gun laws, in 100 years). This is the only reasonable answer.

"Reasonable" means different things to different people. From the reports I have read of this incident the principal of the school thought it was more reasonable to rush the attacker while she was unarmed than to run while her students were massacred.

A functional mental health system and reasonable restrictions on gun ownership? Just spit-balling here.

Reasonable is a subjective term, what do you consider "reasonable restrictions" that would actually prevent these incidents?

To the original question I suspect I would go fetal and shit myself, the only question is in which order.

[Adeptus_Minor]

http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2012/12/17/cowards-mass-murders-and-the-american-public/

Great article.
I like to think that he's right.

Gun issues aside, a serious re-evaluation of how we handle mental health issues and accessibility of care is long overdue.

[Papa_Complex]

"Reasonable" means different things to different people. From the reports I have read of this incident the principal of the school thought it was more reasonable to rush the attacker while she was unarmed than to run while her students were massacred.

If someone is literally willing to take a bullet for her students, then that person is a bloody hero. Most people aren't. I've faced a drunk fuck with a knife, but not a lunatic with a semi-auto rifle, so I can't say how I'd behave in that situation.

As someone who was forced to face the possibility when a child, I came to the conclusion a child should; run like fuck.

Reasonable is a subjective term, what do you consider "reasonable restrictions" that would actually prevent these incidents?

To the original question I suspect I would go fetal and shit myself, the only question is in which order.

"Reasonable", to me, is considering the totality of the situation, of a prospective gun owner. If you're in a house with someone who has a history of violence or mental health issues, then odds are you shouldn't have a firearm on the premises. Proper storage is also an issue.

When I got my Firearms Acquisition Certificate, I went through a RCMP background check, that included fingerprinting. When I got my Restricted Weapons Certificate they repeated that process, to make sure that there were no un-logged changes in my situation. The local Firearms Officer also attended my home in order to check that I had proper, lockable storage for my restricted weapon.

I see nothing unreasonable in these practices.

Would need to fix the insurance acceptance of mental illness as "real" first. It just sucks that our society has gotten to this point.

It has taken us decades to fuck things up. There is no single fix for this.

I think that part of the issue is that the mental health industry is constantly trying to expand the definition of what "mental illness" truly is. For example how many children are diagnosed with ADD or ADHD, who actually don't suffer from either? There are those two conditions, and then there are children who simply have a discipline issue.

But there are very real mental health issues, that can result in the sort of thing we've seen in this incident. Some of them, like schizophrenia, can be managed with medication. Unfortunately the people who can be managed in this way frequently get better and then stop taking their meds, because they think that they're cured. They're no more cured of their particular illness than a diabetic is cured by insulin. For these people part of mental health care should be monitoring of their condition, to insure that they continue to take their medication, but the current method of 'care' frequently equates to a sort of 'catch and release' programme where health insurance is concerned. Diagnose 'em, prescribe 'em, then slap 'em on the ass and send them out into society.

[RACER X]

arm the teachers. 1 district already does and the governor of tx recommended it the other day

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/18/stop-school-shootings-by-letting-teachers-fire-back-say-texas-officials/

luv it

"You know, as educators, we don’t have to be police officers and learn about Miranda Rights and related procedures. We just have to be accurate.”

[Krypt Keeper]

Don't forget that just because you have your CCW that when you pull your presonal carry that everyone Including the security and police know that you are a good guy. You pull your carry and you look just like another plain clothes average Joe with a gun. Well unless you rip open your shirt and you have on your Superman PJ's on or your wallet has BadMotherFucker on it.

You are not a super hero, and this isn't a movie so leave your Yippee Kaya shit at home in front of the TV. Most people run frantically, or panic so bad from shock they sit right there. :tremble: or shit themselves sitting or running.

Take cover and draw weapon or draw weapon and take cover. Depends on if its a next room over or directly in front of you.

see where the danger is (don't go looking for it)

either stay hidden if you can or if possible move to a safe location out of harms way and call 911 (remember when seconds count the police are minutes away)

defend yourself/family (ammo is cheap, always double tap at center mass, or until the threat is neutralized, carry spare mag)

[Switch]

Lynyrd Skynyrd said it best: Handguns are made for killin', they ain't good for nuthin' else.

There is no reason a civilian should own a high powered rifle with a 30-rd mag (or more), that can easily have a bump-stock installed to make it as good as automatic.

I just sold my AR-15 about 2 weeks ago because of principle, and I didn't want to be a hypocrite. You know how much paperwork I had to do for that? Zero. In my opinion, that is ridiculous.

I have to do more paperwork selling a car than I do a gun, and that is insane to me. There should be titles associated with guns, like cars, and they should transfer every time a gun is sold, like cars.

And for you all you yippee kiy yi yay cowboy wannabe motherfuckers, guess what. If the US of A wanted to wage war against it's citizens, you could never stop our military. Sorry. So the point you are trying to make by saving up thousands of rounds of ammunition is moot.

[RACER X]

yeah, and screw all SS bikes.........mopeds FTW!

more people die from cars then high powered rifles, why shouldn't there be more paperwork involved?

[OneSickPsycho]

And for you all you yippee kiy yi yay cowboy wannabe motherfuckers, guess what. If the US of A wanted to wage war against it's citizens, you could never stop our military. Sorry. So the point you are trying to make by saving up thousands of rounds of ammunition is moot.

I disagree...

[goof2]

"Reasonable", to me, is considering the totality of the situation, of a prospective gun owner. If you're in a house with someone who has a history of violence or mental health issues, then odds are you shouldn't have a firearm on the premises. Proper storage is also an issue.

When I got my Firearms Acquisition Certificate, I went through a RCMP background check, that included fingerprinting. When I got my Restricted Weapons Certificate they repeated that process, to make sure that there were no un-logged changes in my situation. The local Firearms Officer also attended my home in order to check that I had proper, lockable storage for my restricted weapon.

I see nothing unreasonable in these practices.

The primary issue is how do you establish that totality of a situation? We often don't have the ability to check the mental health history of the person who wants to buy a firearm, much less the history for everyone in a household. We have a ton of laws that protect the privacy of a patient's medical records. A person can have an extensive history of mental health issues and have none of it show up on any background check. As far as I know the only things related to mental health that would flag on a background check is if someone's mental issues create problems with the police or they are deemed incompetent by the courts. We have two opposing interests and, at least at this time, the government has determined that protecting a patient's privacy is more important than understanding a person's mental health for firearm ownership.

[goof2]

I disagree...

So would the Iraqis and Afghanis. They put up pretty effective resistance for a long time with not much more than light weapons and improvised explosives.

[OneSickPsycho]

So would the Iraqis and Afghanis. They put up pretty effective resistance for a long time with not much more than light weapons and improvised explosives.

Vietnam.

[azoomm]

And for you all you yippee kiy yi yay cowboy wannabe motherfuckers, guess what. If the US of A wanted to wage war against it's citizens, you could never stop our military. Sorry. So the point you are trying to make by saving up thousands of rounds of ammunition is moot.

You have completely missed the point of the 2nd amendment.

[Switch]

You have completely missed the point of the 2nd amendment.

So then bestow upon me your wisdom.

[RACER X]

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/obama-is-gun-salesman-of-the-year-reelection-2012.jpg

[Papa_Complex]

The primary issue is how do you establish that totality of a situation? We often don't have the ability to check the mental health history of the person who wants to buy a firearm, much less the history for everyone in a household. We have a ton of laws that protect the privacy of a patient's medical records. A person can have an extensive history of mental health issues and have none of it show up on any background check. As far as I know the only things related to mental health that would flag on a background check is if someone's mental issues create problems with the police or they are deemed incompetent by the courts. We have two opposing interests and, at least at this time, the government has determined that protecting a patient's privacy is more important than understanding a person's mental health for firearm ownership.

Highlight the duty of medical professionals to report possibly dangerous issues.

Nothing is perfect but doing more, or at least doing something, is better than nothing. If nothing else, storage and inspection rules must be improved.

[shmike]

Nothing is perfect but doing more, or at least doing something, is better than nothing. If nothing else, storage and inspection rules must be improved.

I don't see that being a big hit with those familiar with our Bill of Rights.

[Papa_Complex]

I don't see that being a big hit with those familiar with our Bill of Rights.

Times change. Perhaps it's time for it to change too. At this point in your history there are far too many people screaming about their rights. When the damned thing was originally penned, people understood that they also had some basic responsibilities.

[Trip]

So would the Iraqis and Afghanis. They put up pretty effective resistance for a long time with not much more than light weapons and improvised explosives.

These and Vietnam was never officially waged against citizens. If ridding the civilian population was the goal, the countries would now be populated by a different population base.

It would all depend on how far the government would go and what the situation is...

[Twobanger]

Highlight the duty of medical professionals to report possibly dangerous issues.

Nothing is perfect but doing more, or at least doing something, is better than nothing. If nothing else, storage and inspection rules must be improved.

HIPAA would have to be modified or health care professionals would lose their ability to practice. Republicans have to stand firm on this. No bans without equal effort placed on identifying these people.

[OneSickPsycho]

HIPAA would have to be modified or health care professionals would lose their ability to practice. Republicans have to stand firm on this. No bans without equal effort placed on identifying these people.

They can report on someone if they believe they are a danger to themselves or others. I'm not sure that they have to, but they are certainly permitted to...

[goof2]

Highlight the duty of medical professionals to report possibly dangerous issues.

Nothing is perfect but doing more, or at least doing something, is better than nothing. If nothing else, storage and inspection rules must be improved.

I believe doctors are required to report patients who pose an immediate threat to themselves or others. I also believe reporting anything beyond that is a violation of our medical privacy laws and would open the doctor up to administrative or legal penalties. Our system is set up such that unless someone is in front of a medical professional saying he/she is going to hurt themselves or others in the immediate future the duty that medical professional owes is to the privacy of the patient.

The patient is crazy? Can't say anything. The patient says they sometimes fantasize about mowing people down? Ask more questions but probably can't say anything. The patient says they are going to mow people down in a few days? That you can report. Regardless, my impression is most of the time if these people do talk about what they are going to do it is vague and not to medical professionals.

As far as storage and inspection goes there is a chance that may have helped in this case. That would heavily depend on the mother maintaining proper storage of the weapons outside of inspection periods and denying her son access to the weapons, something she apparently didn't feel was important. In most other cases though it would make zero difference at all. Two examples are the Aurora, CO and VA Tech shooters who were able to legally purchase their weapons, how they had them stored would have no effect.

[Papa_Complex]

I believe doctors are required to report patients who pose an immediate threat to themselves or others. I also believe reporting anything beyond that is a violation of our medical privacy laws and would open the doctor up to administrative or legal penalties. Our system is set up such that unless someone is in front of a medical professional saying he/she is going to hurt themselves or others in the immediate future the duty that medical professional owes is to the privacy of the patient.

The patient is crazy? Can't say anything. The patient says they sometimes fantasize about mowing people down? Ask more questions but probably can't say anything. The patient says they are going to mow people down in a few days? That you can report. Regardless, my impression is most of the time if these people do talk about what they are going to do it is vague and not to medical professionals.

As far as storage and inspection goes there is a chance that may have helped in this case. That would heavily depend on the mother maintaining proper storage of the weapons outside of inspection periods and denying her son access to the weapons, something she apparently didn't feel was important. In most other cases though it would make zero difference at all. Two examples are the Aurora, CO and VA Tech shooters who were able to legally purchase their weapons, how they had them stored would have no effect.

Patient is a paranoid schizophrenic who refuses to take his meds? Report him.

[goof2]

Patient is a paranoid schizophrenic who refuses to take his meds? Report him.

Then lose your license and get prosecuted.

[Papa_Complex]

Then lose your license and get prosecuted.

If anyone actually reports you.

[goof2]

If anyone actually reports you.

You are talking about a mental health professional breaking the law by reporting something to the authorities that is in no way illegal, not in their purview to care about, and in most cases they are powerless to do anything about (involuntary commitment) in an attempt to remove an individual's constitutional right. In between the loony person and the authorities there is a pretty good chance someone will report you. Considering the number of nut jobs out there not taking their medication I would guess the chances are much greater the mental health professional gets reported compared to the loon in question actually trying to do anything.

[Papa_Complex]

You are talking about a mental health professional breaking the law by reporting something to the authorities that is in no way illegal, not in their purview to care about, and in most cases they are powerless to do anything about (involuntary commitment) in an attempt to remove an individual's constitutional right. In between the loony person and the authorities there is a pretty good chance someone will report you. Considering the number of nut jobs out there not taking their medication I would guess the chances are much greater the mental health professional gets reported compared to the loon in question actually trying to do anything.

No, I'm talking about the reasonable expectation that when a potentially dangerous paranoid schizophrenic chooses to go off his meds, it gets reported to authorities.

[Amorok]

"The great body of our citizens shoot less as times goes on. We should encourage rifle practice among schoolboys, and indeed among all classes, as well as in the military services by every means in our power. Thus, and not otherwise, may we be able to assist in preserving peace in the world... The first step – in the direction of preparation to avert war if possible, and to be fit for war if it should come – is to teach men to shoot!" – President Theodore Roosevelt's last message to Congress.


“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” ― Dalai Lama XIV

When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state". Love your country, but never trust its government. - Robert A. Heinlein

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government" - Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good" - George Washington

"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188

The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." - Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story of the John Marshall Court

Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defence? Where is the difference between having our arms in our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defence be the *real* object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? - Patrick Henry, speech of June 9 1788

The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so. - Hitler, April 11 1942

And to answer the original question I would try to assess the situation and determine the best course of action. For me though, the best course of action could not include one where I allow, either through conscious action or lack of action, another to be harmed if there is a chance I could prevent it. So if I were in a general public arena where I was armed and the police were not present, it would be my responsibility to attempt to end the situation as soon and as safely as possible. If I were in a place like a school where I was not armed I would hope I would have the courage of those teachers in Connecticut to put myself in between an armed assailant and innocent children. That being said, the only school I could see myself in would be my kids school, and God help the psycho that endangers my kid. I may not have a gun, but I've got a maglite.

[Papa_Complex]

And yet modern reality tends to put the lie, or at least the serious question, to most of those quotes.

[OneSickPsycho]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78lguSp0BXA

Old video, but still holds a common thread... Aurora theater guy and the CT shooter...

[goof2]

No, I'm talking about the reasonable expectation that when a potentially dangerous paranoid schizophrenic chooses to go off his meds, it gets reported to authorities.

Potentially dangerous paranoid schizophrenics go off their medication (or never use it in the first place) all the time and nothing happens. Absent a specific threat to the safety of themselves or others the government has decided that situation does not justify breaching the patient's privacy.

Of course we can change the laws but that can create another set of issues. The new rules could reasonably be expected to act as a deterrent for some with mental health issues to seek or continue treatment. One situation that is easily predictable is not only does a patient stop using medication, they stop going to the doctor first to avoid getting reported.

[azoomm]

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335739/facts-about-mass-shootings-john-fund

[Twobanger]

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

[Adeptus_Minor]

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

Holy shit... a LONG read, but easily one of the most intelligent lectures on the irrational thinking behind expanded gun control that I've ever read.
:dthumb:

[Papa_Complex]

Aaaaaaaaaand the NRA has jumped the shark.

[fatbuckRTO]

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

I’ve argued with lawyers, professors, professional lobbyists, and once made a state rep cry:lol: