USA Today Runs Concealed Carry Article By Retired Navy SEAL

[Murdock]

Not to start an argument, or maybe I read this wrong, but didn't EVERYONE on those planes die? The passengers of three airliners were submissive and took out thousands of innocents on the ground, flight 93 fought and took out no other innocents. Had there been an armed air marshal, or even an armed civilian, on board, Flight 93 might have been even more successful in their resistance.

Fight back and lessen the casualties, or be submissive and allow others to suffer your fate?

Sarcasm is just one more service I offer.

 

[OldeTSgt]

I'll only bring this up because it happened only about 3/4 of a mile from my home.

2 deputies wounded in Spokane shootout | Local & Regional | Seattle News, Weather, Sports, Breaking News | KOMO News

My question is what kind of firearm training does the department have where both deputies emptied there guns and never hit the BG but he hit both of them several times.
One Deputy is back on desk duty, the other is not.
I forgot to ask the Sherriff the last time I met him.

I can't speak for what Spokane Sheriff's Dept trains now but in 1990-1 When I was a Reserve Deputy (I was active USAF at the time) our qualification was pretty extensive at the Academy after that our qualifications were yearly and another when we transitioned from the Model 15 to 1076 Smith.

Stationary targets for PPC out to 50 yds but most was 3, 7, 10 15 and 25 yds - included transitioned drills using bowling pins and steel targets mock up of cars to shoot from a seated position - and mock houses in teams

At Milton PD (I was also on active duty then) our qualifications were 2 times a year - with personal supplied weapons (Model 19 in my case)

At Sunnyside PD - it was annual qualifications but the department supplied a box of ammo per month to any officer that asked and we could go to the range to practice with a range officer (I was very good friends/hunting buddies with 2 of them) again it was Washington State required course for qualification - I almost always shot Master or Expert

In TX Dept of Criminal Justice - we only qualified annually - that that was a joke in my opinion - I would not trust my life or the gun handling skills of very many CO's I worked with.

As a civillian - I shoot more and with more practical purpose than I ever did at an LEO/CO including when I was doing entry occasionally - in the military I qualified 2 times a year - with two weapons M16 and M9.

Here on the farm when my new wife wanted to learn to shoot I took her through every drill I practiced and remembered - weak hand shooting, light use, miami drills and transitioning to rifle and pistol and vice versa - when she took her CHL class shooting a M&P40 and scored higher than the men including some former military and security officers

 

[Don 73]

Sarcasm is just one more service I offer.

 

[HKB]

Obama has this saying that he keeps repeating, "we are the only country where...." I don't want to be like those other countries Mr President and if you or anyone else does then move there.

Most any concealed carry holder with a little training could have foiled the San Bernardino attackers plans. So far as we know the attackers had a gathering of people in a room to shoot, an easy target of opportunity with little or no time to escape. Had someone been there to pop of a few rounds in their direction they would have probably caved in for a few minutes while some victims could have had a chance to run.

For those anti-gun libs that like to talk about how evil guns are in the work place, you might think twice, the next active shooter might be taking notes.

 

[Louchia]

The response demanded of you from the gun control cult is exactly the same:

• Submit
• Die
• Disappear

What? I'm not sure of your meaning.

 

[Motorsporting]

I agree that those trained in combat would have a much better chance to succeed in a gun battle. I don't agree that everyone else should concede to inevitable defeat and thus not even try.
I can only hope to never have to encounter such a baptism by fire, however, if that occasion should arise, I pray I can act honorably and responsibly. One never fully knows how they will react until called upon.

Well said.

 

[66 shooter]

Just remember...the guys who made the 2nd amendment possible in the first place were just a bunch of "regular guys" who said enough is enough.

 

[explorer13421]

I am not a police officer, retired clandestine service officer or military veteran. I have had a permit to carry for over 40 years, hunt and have shot pistol competitively. I have studied applicable law and studied after action reports of criminal and terrorist incidents.

I carry a handgun so that I have additional options in the event I am caught up in an incident. I do not think I could outdraw someone holding me at gunpoint, but if a gunman had his back to me as he shoots cowering victims, I would like to have the option to shoot at him. There are other possibilities in which I think having a gun gives me options.

The best estimate I have seen is that approximately 50,000 French civilians died in the aerial and naval bombardment leading up to the World War II invasion of Normandy and the subsequent battle. That is a lot of collateral damage, however, without risking collateral damage I doubt the Allies could have successfully invaded.

There is a risk of collateral damage in a criminal or terrorist incident if a civilian attempts to use his or her personally owned weapon in opposition to the criminal or terrorist. Such a risk has to be considered in light of the risk of not trying to do something.

 

[cmort666]

What? I'm not sure of your meaning.

It seemed pretty clear and simple to me.

Both that alleged SEAL and the anti-gun cult (Brady, VPC, Cease Fire, Moms Demand Massacres, etc.) are counseling that rather than defend yourself, that you should just "take it like a man".

Not only don't I agree with it, I don't respect anyone who would suggest, much less DEMAND it.

As long as I have ANY means to resist with DEADLY FORCE, I'm not going be shot in the back, never mind shot in the back of the head, execution style. Telling somebody that unless you're Jason Bourne you just have to let somebody slaughter you as you run away is being an ACCOMPLICE to the killings.

The "idea" that you could make things "WORSE" than being shot in the back, lying on the ground is unspeakably vile.

 

[shawn mccarver]

I have a right to self-defense, regardless of where I happen to be at the time I need to exercise that right. Period.

The assumption in the article seems to be that all gun owners want to "save the day" in a bad situation. In fact, I suspect most of us do not wish to engage. I suspect all of us have no desire to merely lay down and die helplessly either. I think most of us want a "fighting chance" to escape.

I could not disagree more with the author of the article. The author gets no points for defending America somewhere else, and then returning here to fight against the same rights he purportedly defended abroad.

 

[therewolf]

And yet, through all this, I still choose to be armed, if,

and God forbid, when I am in the unlikely situation where I

need to protect myself with a firearm.

Things rarely go as planned, but I cannot conceive of a

situation in which I would be safer unarmed.

BTW, I was stationed on a Navy Destroyer for 3 years. You want to talk about

"gunfire" ? Try being stationed next to a large ship's gun at battle quarters

for a couple years. "Loud" doesn't begin to describe what a barrage from

these puppies firing feels and sounds like. Somehow, some way, I don't think

somebody firing small arms in my general direction is going to impress me much...

 

[Horn]

Gabby Had a Glock?

Sorry- Anybody who has hitched his wagon to the Gabby Giffords campaign has lost all credibilty on the issue, ex- Senior Enlisted SEAL or not.

I don't think that anybody disagrees that "Joe CCW" probably won't be a high-speed and tactical as the E8 who wrote the article, but that should not matter. Even a .22 deringer fired into the terrorist's torso as he walks up to execute you in the head is 1000X better than "Please don't kill me!".

Agree with the .22 derringer.
I seem to remember from the local news (Tucson) very shortly after she was shot it mentioned she owned a Glock! (19, I think was mentioned) Now its all anti-gun?
Anyone else living in the Tucson area recall this?
And it was a guy packing (decided not to fire, crowd) that physically took the shooter down.
Here in Arizona anyone can pack, no permit required. 2nd Amendment state!

 

[Horn]

I Agree

First off, thanks for editing my post while quoting it. Second, if you are that offended by what I said it must be because deep down you know it is true. I did not say that every CCW holder is more adept at handgun use than any officer, but the facts are that MOST police departments do not spend more than 20 hours per year in live fire sidearms training. That pales in comparison to those of us who practice for IDPA or other structured competition.

I have family members and many good friends that are police officers with numerous different forces. If they are not avid gun enthusiasts that are on he range on their own time they all admit that they do not get nearly the amount of live fire practice thru their departments they would like to have.

If your department offers you more training great, but I would love to hear from the other LEO members of is forum if they think my comment is incorrect. Most on this forum probably practice pretty regularly, but what about their coworkers who rarely if ever go out on their own to shoot.

I agree with you. (Retired Cop) I think there is (I hope) more required practice and training today than when I was active.
We're all living in a likely war zone today. And, yes most of the guys on this forum are getting in a lot of quality training and range time. I always believed in the citizens packing even back then.

 

[Capt.Jim]

What I meant is the bad guys have mentally prepared to pull
A gun and shoot. Good guy sitting in a movie theater when deafening gunfire suddenly rings out is surprised and frightened and is going to need a few seconds to get his bearings and assess.

As for the nerve to act, defense of yourself is instinct. Defense of others is not. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I carry a gun to protect ME and my family. I hear shots and I am drawing my gun and pushing my family towards safety. My obligation is to stay alive. I am not risking possible arrest or lawsuits when I was trying to help. Would I fire a weapon if I was trapped in a room about to be slaughtered? I am sure I would. But only if I had no means of escape.

And the truth of the matter is, nobody here can say what they would do if a shooter started firing. Hit the deck, run for your life, **** your pants, or engage him? Never gonna know unless it happens to you. Thankfully, the odds are small it ever will. Those here who say they would take the guy on are fooling themselves. You don't know what you would do.

As for the cops surviving the final shootout with only one injury and both perps dead, I am thankful for that. But as I said, they were mentally prepared to fire. They knew the bad guys were in that car and had already killed people. They knew they had the green light to light them up, so they did. Not to mention the killers were contained in a vehicle and there was nearly a dozen cops firing into a contained space. Like shooting fish in a barrel. I'll bet once the woman began to fire they opened up on the car and she immediately stopped firing as she took cover and I am sure multiple hits. I hope she felt every one of them.

As for my mental picture of a shooting being wrong, what makes you think that? Every mass shooting caught on camera has people running for their lives immediately. Colombine, the Paris shooting last month in the cafe, not to mention actually being away a scene when shots start going off. People run like crazy. Obese people can suddenly run like gazelles. If you're trapped I can see hiding under a chair since there's no place to go, but I don't see people sitting still if there are other options.

I understand that you carry only for your own and your loved ones safety. Nothing is wrong with that. Also, nobody here claims they will try to take the shooters out in order to save others. Nobody is advising you to be the hero for other people and defend them. Especially if you have the means to take yourself and your loved ones to safety and away from a shooting scene which is the most intelligent thing to do if you can!

The point we're discussing is, if people who got caught in an active shooter situation like in Charlie Hebdo offices or in Paris Cafe or in Sandy Hook or in San Bernardino or in Luby's restaurant or in Fort Hood had a gun, outcome could've been different and better for victims, not worse!

Every single person died in those shootings because they were not able to run away!

Please watch the video from Paris cafe carefully again.
At the very first few shots people immediately become the hunchback of Notre Dame.
Then, at the following seconds they are either under a table or behind a bar.
You can't even see the women who were sitting outside because they were laying on the floor. When attackers gun jammed and he walked away they both got up and ran.

At a shooting scene only people you see still standing and walking around after the shots being fired ARE the shooters themselves!
Because that gives them a tactical advantage (like having the high ground).

And yes, your mental picture is wrong about what happens at a shooting scene! What makes me think that? Experience!

Again I was in the NATO forces and I was a part of special urban warfare team as an SAS Commando before I was selected for Sniper training and then I myself trained many soldiers. Main part of our training before and during the Gulf War was how to identify and take out targets in close quarters within a second or two.

With those training I walked in many streets entered many homes, buildings, rooms, tents, barns, you name it! Patrol the streets on foot and in vehicles. Witnessed lots of explosions and shootings and I am still here to talk about it!

Trust me I know what I am talking about!

If you want to learn more about what to expect and what to do in a similar situation please attend one of my classes!

 

[cmort666]

Also, nobody here claims they will try to take the shooters out in order to save others.

If you were armed and saw somebody with a Kalashnikov shooting toddlers at Santa's Village, would you walk away?

 

[MOONDAWG]

You do what you gotta do, and so will I.

As Clint Eastwood says, "A man's gotta know his limitations".

 

[keith44spl]

It's the same ol rhetoric......

Anyone can gives an interview or write an article on any subject, for any reason.

When one thinks that it's more dangerous for common folks to defend themselves
or to engage another that is trying to kill them or others...It's a sad day sure nuff.

I'm am a card carrying member of the 'Response to Active Shooter' and
a former member of a high risk warrant team, and have been there too.

I'd rather chance a lit'l friendly fire, that to be killed out right and or
watch others being killed or injured because of the nay-sayers wanting to dis-arm Americans.

More that precise marksmanship, more than any special training, more than the caliber,
more than all the things one thinks of to defend one's self or others....

One must have the intestinal fortitude and a greater will to survive,
than those that would try to kill us.



That's all I've got to say on this matter.


.

 

[dwever]

Well, now USA Today has posted an article by former Congresswoman Gifford. More of the same. Nothing to see really.

I would with all respect encourage us on this forum that in the process of defending the Second Amendment that we try not to be too hard on other patriots in their exercise of the First Amendment, even when their message runs counter to what we might of said.

This past February, as a conservative Republican, it bothered me on a detail involving the President to hear LEOs make cracks like, "It would be a lot harder to take a bullet for this President." While I know they were just running off at the mouth and they would of unquestionably performed honorably and with full sacrifice it was disrespectful to the Office and the person. The point is, as patriots we defend the Office and the Person because like it or not, they are the same.

I did not vote for President Obama, but once elected he was my President as much as if I had headed up his campaign. And dear Lord I have so often disagreed with him, but I defend him and respect him and revere him as I have every President because of a Constitutional process that expressed the will of The People of this nation and placed him as my President in that Office prescribed by that Document. Period. And in many ways our system of government has been a light to our world for over two-hundred years. If we are going to revere our Constitution and our government, then we must also revere the Constitutional rights of others to vociferously disagree with us, even when the disagreement reaches all the way to competing interpretations of the Constitution. And that means prosecuting our disagreement with all energy but with mutual respect.

Regarding the Navy Seal who wrote the article, whether you respect what he's done for your country or not, personally attacking him or suggesting he might have PTSD is, I would humbly suggest that some of these comments, were out of bounds. Even without his sterling service to this nation, he has the right to have an opinion different from mine and for me not to attack, belittle, or mock him for it. To recognize that right, and to disagree honorably when others of competing thoughts exercise that right, that honorable conduct is the greater act of patriotism because in so doing you recognize the "self evident" truth of equality of all souls in this great society. (July 4, 1776, June 21, 1788, December 15, 1791).

 

[gunnails]

Dwever,

Senior Chief called out a great many on this board, what he said is considered dangerous to many here.

I do agree with mutual respect and keeping to the high road in debates,
But the Senior Chief put him self out there, he is fair game for criticism. Just as you and I are for anything we may post.

Seems that we have had a civil discussion here, maybe I missed something?

 

[Don 73]

If you were armed and saw somebody with a Kalashnikov shooting toddlers at Santa's Village, would you walk away?

I for one, took an oath to protect and defend the citizens of the US, State of Ohio, County of XXXXX, City of XXXXX. That being said, I would only walk away if I were still able to after engaging said dirtbag.