quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
The New York Slimes called it a "statistical unicorn."

Yeah, why is that, asshole? Even in this case Dicken was carrying in a "gun free zone." Maybe because most of these cases occur in places that leave people helpless.

***********

Proponents of expanded gun rights were quick to praise Dicken’s actions. “We will say it again: The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” the National Rifle Association wrote in a tweet Monday morning.

But Dicken’s act, though heroic, was also a statistical unicorn. An examination of 433 active shooter attacks in the United States between 2000 and 2021 showed that only 22 ended with a bystander shooting an attacker, according to data from the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University.


NYT link even though you need a subscription. Haha, yeah right.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/0...a-mall-shooting.html

Nowhere near a statistical Unicorn.

https://www.thetrace.org/2022/...good-guys-with-guns/

How many instances of defensive gun use are there each year?
The number of DGUs, as these incidents are commonly known, is hard to pin down. Law enforcement agencies don’t typically classify DGUs as a standalone category. The FBI tracks justifiable homicides, but states aren’t required to submit those figures, so the data is incomplete. And the FBI figures omit defensive assaults, in which someone fights off an attack, and brandishings.

This ambiguity has opened the door to a fierce debate between gun violence researchers and pro-gun advocates, who tend to cite different sets of data. Academics largely rely on the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), a twice-yearly poll of crime victims conducted by the federal government, while gun rights activists point to a series of telephone surveys conducted in the early 1990s by a criminologist and self-described “gun control skeptic” named Gary Kleck.

The NCVS identifies far fewer instances of defensive gun use. According to the most recent firearms violence report, published in April, 2 percent of victims of nonfatal violent crime — that includes rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault — and 1 percent of property crime victims use guns in self-defense. According to the survey, firearms were used defensively in 166,900 nonfatal violent crimes between 2014 and 2018, which works out to an average of 33,380 per year. Over the same period, defensive gun use was reported in 183,300 property crimes, or an average of 36,660 per year.

Taken together, that’s 70,040 instances of defensive gun use per year.

Notably, the NCVS figure excludes cases of simple assault. There are other caveats: Survey respondents are only asked about defensive measures if they report being victims of certain crimes, including rape, assault, burglary, larceny, and car theft. That means victims of trespassing and commercial crimes are not given the opportunity to report defensive gun use. And respondents aren’t asked directly about guns — they’re asked what they did to protect themselves or their property; it’s up to them to supply specifics.

Even if it's just a unicorn and 1% incidence rate, so the fuck what? My right shall not be infringed, unicorn or not.

Reminds of the story of the guy walking on the beach throwing a crab back into the water out of the thousands that were on the beach. Can't save them all, but what he did mattered for the one he threw back.

Just one life - save it.

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:
Just one life - save it.

As I’ve said before, we can’t change the world, but we can change part of it. If enough parts get changed, the world changes.

New(ish) member here. Brief background. 66years old. Owned a small construction company since 1978. Still work everyday. First NEW firerm purchased by me without help from an adult, was a BDA 45acp in 1979.

I introduce a couple new shooters to firearms every year. On my dime. I provide the firearm and the ammo. Been doing it for couple decades. Due to this, and being in business for nearly 5 decades, I get asked a lot of questions, about a lot of topics.

I have spent the last 2 days discussing this act of Heroism in a mall that I have visited this year. The points that I have emphasized have covered 3 main topics. The LAW. The Risk. The Reporting.

Another point is that I cut the cable in 2020, when FNC called Arizona for Biden, so I have to look for news. I dont spend a lot of time looking under dog shit, so I havent really visited any leftist media.

The Law...The hero was entirely Lawful in his action, including carrying in that Mall. Depite the posted signage to the contrary. He acted appropriately and saved lives. Explaing how each individual has a responsibility to know the Law was rewarding.

The Risk...Obviously, the young Hero exposed himself to great risk, both in real time and ongoing, when he chose that response. He acted appropriately and saved lives. Explaining that risk to the uninformed, really opened some eyes today. Explaining how a vote, could eliminate some of those risk was rewarding.

The Reporting...I have pointed out the trap, by us accepting the media using the term "Good Samaritan". The media are using that term to avoid using the correct descriptor. The Hero is a Citizen, using his 2nd Amendment Rights, to be proactive in removing a present threat to himself and others. He was not acting in the Historical or Legal definition of a Good Samaritan. He was, and is, "A Good Guy With a Gun".

Dont let the Left frame the narrative.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
As I’ve said before, we can’t change the world, but we can change part of it. If enough parts get changed, the world changes.

I may or may not be older than you. But I'm certainly not wiser. I'm blooming late in life - many things you guys have known for a long time is only now dawning on me. But slowly, I think I'm getting there; one hopes, anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:

quote:

Originally posted by dcowboyscr:
This happened 2.4 miles from my house. Im literally at this mall every day. Thank god a good guy stopped this guy before many more people were injured and/or killed.

Since you're familiar with the scene, does the 40 yard first shot sound about correct as to engagement distance

judging by the size of the food court I’d say it’s believable. Restrooms are circled.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: dcowboyscr,

quote:

The Reporting...I have pointed out the trap, by us accepting the media using the term "Good Samaritan". The media are using that term to avoid using the correct descriptor. The Hero is a Citizen, using his 2nd Amendment Rights, to be proactive in removing a present threat to himself and others. He was not acting in the Historical or Legal definition of a Good Samaritan. He was, and is, "A Good Guy With a Gun".

Dont let the Left frame the narrative.

Outstanding! Thank you for all you've done over the years.

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:

quote:

The Reporting...I have pointed out the trap, by us accepting the media using the term "Good Samaritan". The media are using that term to avoid using the correct descriptor. The Hero is a Citizen, using his 2nd Amendment Rights, to be proactive in removing a present threat to himself and others. He was not acting in the Historical or Legal definition of a Good Samaritan. He was, and is, "A Good Guy With a Gun".

Dont let the Left frame the narrative.

Outstanding! Thank you for all you've done over the years.

Thank You!

After many years of debate with the Leftist fools, I have learned to not let them establish the ground rules.

Clarity of meaning trumps Agreement every time.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:
Since you're familiar with the scene, does the 40 yard first shot sound about correct as to engagement distance

Yes, although it doesn't matter if it was at 40 inches, confirmation of the actual distance would be good to have.

Here is a pic of the food court. The perp was shot over by the restrooms next to Asian Chao. It is reported the granddaughter and Dicken were in the food court at the time, and that Dicken stationed himself by the pillar during the start of firing back, then moved forward.



Here is a map of the food court, with other stores as a comparison.

Wow, just wow…

To think this country has come to the point where the left and “media” criticize a man for taking control of a horrific situation and saving an untold number of lives disgusts me to a level I can’t really describe.

It isn’t just gun control they want, but mind control and government control over every aspect of life.


As for the “Unicorn” trope, just fuck the right off with any suggestion that it is somehow better for others to die than for a hero to step up, assess the risk and take decisive action.


Time to turn the tide and maybe go on the offensive so criminals think twice. How about some lawmakers take a page from the progressive playbook and start proposing laws to make a point, even if they have no hope of passing.


Maybe something like the “Citizens Use Legitimate Tactics, Heros Everywhere, Homies Expect Reasonable Defense” (CUL THE HERD) Act?



Something simple along the lines of:

“The duty of every law abiding citizen of these United States is to locate, close with and destroy the criminal by fire and maneuver, or repel criminal assault by fire and close combat.

Therefore all citizens of good moral character shall be provided (at no cost) with the appropriate tools, training, authority, and freedom to carry out this duty if necessary at any time or location”


Hey after all, ”IF IT SAVES JUST *ONE* LIFE…”

The new Dicken Drill is making for some interesting content. I haven't seen Guns & Tactics video before but he did have a Glock 43x. I now need to reserve a bay and bring my Challenge Targets

I think once a year IDPA would put targets out at 35 yards.

Under far more stress, this is got to be something else.

Aim small, shoot small. 8/10 is outstanding.

quote:

Originally posted by SIGnified:
I think once a year IDPA would put targets out at 35 yards.

Under far more stress, this is got to be something else.

Aim small, shoot small. 8/10 is outstanding.

We do it every year at the end of April at The Western IDPA Regional Championship in Ione CA.

We used to put them out at 45 yards. One year it was 4 steel poppers and 2 paper out there...plus 2 gimme targets at 15 yards

But they changed the Rule Book to limit shots to 35 yards

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:
Even if it's just a unicorn and 1% incidence rate, so the fuck what? My right shall not be infringed, unicorn or not.

The number of tragedies which don't occur because the shooter thinks, "someone here might be armed" does not show up in their data.

They need to go back and try again.

Where I grew up, there was an old saying, "Don't mess with the little old ladies in Sweet Home, they'll just shoot you." There was no crime there, other than bar fights, which didn't involve the little old ladies.

I read the young man Dickens not only was a sharp guy during the incident, but afterwards. He ain't talking to any media and has retained full counsel. He very well could be aware of the way the media treated Sandmann and Rittenhouse, and from some of the social media shit and media accounts so far, he may be the next Grand Sweepstakes winner.

I almost never make any comments on this board because I come here to gather information and learn. But this time, I have to have a say.
After the Disaster in Texas, where people waited to be told what to do, we have this incident in Indiana, where someone Did Something. Regardless of the quality of tool, the sights, the distance, or the surroundings, He Did what was needed. No command structure. No support structure. Him, alone, No enablers to help. 8 for 10 in 15 seconds. First shot hit and advance to the target to confirm it was no longer a danger. That is the message we need to keep circulating. Do what needs doing.

quote:

Originally posted by Jjmcd: He Did what was needed. No command structure. No support structure. Him, alone, No enablers to help. 8 for 10 in 15 seconds. First shot hit and advance to the target to confirm it was no longer a danger. That is the message we need to keep circulating. Do what needs doing.

Nicely put, Jjmcd. Thank you.

quote:

Originally posted by x0225095:

quote:

Originally posted by dcowboyscr:
Just saw a leaked photo of the shooter on Reddit after he’d been stopped.

Yup. Fuck that guy and his new toe tag.

Necrophilia is not a virtue. Repent, seek the straight and narrow path! And don't come back until you have redeemed yourself. [ Apologies to Sister Mary Stigmata]

quote:

To think this country has come to the point where the left and “media” criticize a man for taking control of a horrific situation and saving an untold number of lives disgusts me to a level I can’t really describe.

Which reminds me of the LA riots being broadcast on TV and the armed "roof top Koreans" guarding their supermarket. An LA TV Bubblehead on air asked if those guns were registered.

If we are lucky, the Supreme court decision will put thousands of concealed carry persons out in public, and mass shooters will start dropping. As the word gets out, there would be less and less mass shooters.

quote:

Originally posted by AKA T.S.:
I introduce a couple new shooters to firearms every year. On my dime. I provide the firearm and the ammo. Been doing it for couple decades. Due to this, and being in business for nearly 5 decades, I get asked a lot of questions, about a lot of topics.

Outstanding!
This what this community needs more of, a willingness to engage those who are unfamiliar and the composure to disprove the many falsehoods and lies that have been perpetuated by the news, entertainment and the idiot friend.

quote:

The Reporting...I have pointed out the trap, by us accepting the media using the term "Good Samaritan". The media are using that term to avoid using the correct descriptor. The Hero is a Citizen, using his 2nd Amendment Rights, to be proactive in removing a present threat to himself and others. He was not acting in the Historical or Legal definition of a Good Samaritan. He was, and is, "A Good Guy With a Gun".

Dont let the Left frame the narrative.

Not sure the usage of 'Good Samaritan' is necessarily a word-smithing trap but, simply lazy journalism, using well-worn but incorrect descriptors. You're not wrong though, the press is very active and complicit in the framing language and narrative, and we as gun owners need to be aware of how narratives are spun. This young man is an responsible citizen, a good guy with a gun.