Handgun Combatives just posted this on Facebook:

Additional info from the Indiana Mall shooting from a law enforcement friend living in the area...
"Got some info from a Simon Properties guy who has watched the Greenwood mall active shooter attack video footage. He doesn't think about the details like we do, but I confirmed a few things thru him.
The distance at which Eli Dickens fired was 43 yards, according to the computerized AI video system there in the mall. The system is accurate to within ten feet.
Eli was up out of his chair within seconds and engaged with the shooter.
Eli fired from around the side of a flat-topped, squared-sided trash bin next to a floor-to-ceiling column or pillar there inside the building. He was shooting from what we'd refer to as a "strong-side barricade" position. Using the side of the bin to stabilize his grip and weapon. The guy told me it looked more like he was crouched there as opposed to kneeling.
It appears Eli made a kill shot with the first round he fired based on the suspect's reaction. His second round was a hit also. The active shooter simply wilted after being shot and showed no interest in doing anything other than getting back into the men's restroom door. The active shooter never fired at Eli, never even swung his gun toward him. It appears that he wasn't expecting anyone else to have a gun.
After the active shooter collapsed, he kept moving, and Eli continued to fire until the target's movements halted. Eli hit with 8 of the 10 shots he fired. It was a blessing that the active shooter collapsed so quickly. It's always easier to hit a stationary target.
There appear to have been bystanders running for the nearby exit door near the confrontation. I don't understand people running toward or past people who are armed and shooting at someone. But people do strange things when they're under stress.
This part is in no way confirmed, but another security guy at the Greenwood mall said the empty casings from Eli's pistol were marked with Federal Cartridge headstamps.
I find it interesting that the active shooter was psychologically out of the fight pretty much immediately upon being shot. That's largely been the case with active shooter incidents since we've been keeping stats on them in the 1990's. Except, of course, for the ones involving militarized terrorists, like the Inland Empire (California) attack in 2012. I'm thinking of the active shooters involving suspects who are incel civilians like the recent ones in Highland Park and Buffalo.

Bubbatime, thanks for the informative post. Sounds absolutely textbook. It will be interesting to see what, if any, relevant background Eli had to produce the exemplary result.

Maybe the Lord just put the right person with the right background there at precisely the right moment.

Rather amusing that the Liberal activists are quoting Scripture to complain about the description of Eli as a "Good Samaritan". Not only do they know more than YOU about raising your OWN kids, they are also Biblical Scholars.

quote:

SNIP…“There appear to have been bystanders running for the nearby exit door near the confrontation. I don't understand people running toward or past people who are armed and shooting at someone. But people do strange things when they're under stress.”…/SNIP

People are sketchy, nervous animals….most won’t think about hey there’s a guy shooting I’m gonna run the other way…they know they came from that way and they run back the way they came…all the time they could have done a half right face and run away without being downrange of a fusillade of 9mm projectiles.

I’ve seen it happen in several shooting when I was a cop. People don’t think. Examine people with you when you go to the grocery store. Stop your family and ask them this, “where’s the way out if someone starts shooting right now” 99% of them will point towards the way they came in….now tell them” the shooter is there..” and point where you just came from. Most will likely point toward another door where people usually enter. We all know there are back doors to the grocery store but we’ve never been thru them so in our little dog brains (the one being used when the shit hits the fan) tell us to run to the other door or to the door we came in.

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:
Except, of course, for the ones involving militarizedcommitted terrorists, like the Inland Empire (California) attack in 2012. I'm thinking of the active shooters involving suspects who are incel civilians like the recent ones in Highland Park and Buffalo.

Fixed if for you. We as gun owners and responsible citizens, need to be cognizant of the words we use and how they can be warped when quoted or, mis-used. Militant/militerized can easily be painted ono anybody with an AR-, has some camo, more than one gun, has 100+ rds of ammo....

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:

Fixed if for you...

Those were not his words. Perhaps you should get on Facebook and let the actual author know about his faux pas.

Bumping this thread to include this video analysis and commentary by Paul Harrell. He may not be super tactical HSLD, but I always appreciate his common sense non-sensational approach. This video is NOT a play by play break down of the Greenwood mall shooting, but instead the last of a 3 part video series that discusses mass shootings, demonstrates the capabilities of various handguns at varying distances, looks at the trade-offs between shooting accurately and quickly at distance, the trade-offs in using a stable shooting platform while shooting at greater distances, and then Paul finishes with 5 questions he believes every armed citizen should ask themselves and answer, before deciding whether to engage a mass shooter.

@ 30 minute video


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kbaiejoAjcc

That’s the first video I’ve seen by him, so thanks for posting it.

I thought that the most valuable portion was his discussion of his five questions, and especially the first three, and double especially number three: Will you be mistaken for the bad guy? Actual events have demonstrated that is the most likely, and I believe it could have been stressed more than it was.

To quibble, though, I was much less impressed with his discussion of shooting strategies and marksmanship. As is very often the case in similar demonstrations or discussions, the targets he was using were grossly oversized as compared with real people. For example, one of the hits he took credit for when shooting at the head would most likely not achieved the incapacitation he evidently thought it would, especially with the low-powered cartridge that he thought warranted shooting at the head. In fact, unless there was reason to believe the BG was wearing armor, I would be least likely to try for a head shot if all I had was a low-powered, hard to shoot handgun.

I won’t go into a detailed explanation of my thoughts on the marksmanship and ballistics covered in the video, but the video isn’t one I’d recommend to anyone for those topics.
What should be stressed is, “Don’t fool yourself about your own shooting abilities.”

At the end he says he’s a “professional.” Do we know in what profession?

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
At the end he says he’s a “professional.” Do we know in what profession?

Youtuber?

Paul Harrel is a life long shooter. He’s won many awards, trophy’s. He was in the army where he shot as well as his MOS(which escapes me right now). He’s currently a dental assistant in the northwest USA. He’s been putting out shooting videos for a decade. And he’s been in a real life self defense situation where he shot and killed a guy.

You should watch a few videos before making a judgement call.

His “don’t try this I’m a professional “ is done tongue and cheek

Like all things I see, I take them with a grain of salt and try and absorb the good and forget the bad.

Haven't watched this video of his, but I always find Harrell to be well spoken and knowledgeable, from the few other of his videos I've watched. Enjoyed his analysis of the 1986 Miami shootout quite a bit. He comes across as unassuming and laid back that reflects in his presentations, unlike 99% of the spastic tacticool experts on YT.

Here's Harrell's "Who I am" video:

Link

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

...

To quibble, though, I was much less impressed with his discussion of shooting strategies and marksmanship. As is very often the case in similar demonstrations or discussions, the targets he was using were grossly oversized as compared with real people. For example, one of the hits he took credit for when shooting at the head would most likely not achieved the incapacitation he evidently thought it would, especially with the low-powered cartridge that he thought warranted shooting at the head. In fact, unless there was reason to believe the BG was wearing armor, I would be least likely to try for a head shot if all I had was a low-powered, hard to shoot handgun.

Sigfreund, I think your criticisms are fair. I could understand his intending to make head shots with the .25 acp at 7 yards, but when he pushed back to longer distances he had me scratching my head as to why he continued to go with head shots.

In addition to his many YouTube channel fans he has his share of detractors as well. In several of his videos, while discussing various topics and principles, he'll use everything from fruit and soda bottle targets to cinder blocks and meat targets to demonstrate what's being discussed, and I think it's fair to say he doesn't always focus on scientific testing. Also, he's been repeatedly criticized for not consistently wearing eye protection while shooting, and although I disagree with his choice, he goes into his reasons in the video in a following post below.

I don't always agree with him, but I like his quiet, thoughtful, intelligent presentations, and I especially like the fact that his teaching style includes presenting the material and factors that he wants to convey, then uses shooting demonstrations to illustrate his points... but, depending on the principles being demonstrated, he stops short of declaring with absolute certainty what a shooter should practice or believe, and instead encourages his viewers to draw their own conclusions.

...

quote:

What should be stressed is, “Don’t fool yourself about your own shooting abilities.”

Agreed...as well as understanding the limitations of both the gun and the caliber as distance to the target(s) increases.

quote:

At the end he says he’s a “professional.” Do we know in what profession?

You ask a good question... and forced me to question just what I knew about his background. When I first came across his videos 2 or 3 years ago, I thought that I recalled reading a few articles in gun magazines from years ago that he had written, but when I did a cursory internet search I couldn't find any articles he wrote, so perhaps I'm confusing him with another gun writer.

I've only watched maybe 10 or 15 of his videos over the last few years, but in a few of the ones I've watched he's occasionally made some inferences to his military service.

I was going to include several additional details about Paul Harrell, but as motor59 found an excellent video posted below, it's probably best if you watch the video where he details his background and experience in his own words.

I'll add a few additional details not mentioned in the video, in the video embed.

quote:

Originally posted by motor59:
Here's Harrell's "Who I am" video:

Link

motor59, I hadn't seen that video so thanks for posting it. In addition to embedding the video, I'll include a few additional details not mentioned.

@ 8 minute video


https://m.youtube.com/watch?ti...Seo&feature=emb_logo

A few observations or details not mentioned in the video:

- In the opening sequence, several military awards and badges are displayed. I don't recognize most of them but, if I'm not mistaken, in addition to an Air Assault Badge I believe one of them is a Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

- Paul Harrell owned and operated a business called Disaster Contingencies Inc., now defunct. I don't know what this business specifically did, but I assumed it may be one of the reasons why he describes himself as a professional.

- I've seen some internet postings by others mention that his father was a police officer and that his brother is a sheriffs deputy.

- As mentioned in the video, he has been involved in two citizen shootings. The second shooting involved Harrell and two of his friends sitting around their truck after a hunt in an open hilly area on public land. Harrell noticed a truck drive into the area several hundred meters from their location, and just as he could see them he was certain the occupants could see his group sitting around the truck. A few minutes later a number of rounds started cracking over their heads and they all took cover behind the truck. Shortly after the firing stopped the truck he noticed earlier was observed leaving the area. Neither the truck nor anyone in the group was hit and they did not return fire.

In the first shooting incident, @ 2005 or 2006, Harrell was camping with his wife and a friend when he was involved in a strange incident and shot an attacker in the campground who tried to hit his wife while driving a truck. Harrell shot the attacker with a nearby long gun (some reports say an AR), and the attacker died at the hospital.

Supposedly it was a difficult crime scene to investigate because by the time the Sherrif's investigators arrived it was dark, so they decided to return to investigate in the morning, but over the night it had snowed so tire tracks, shell casings, and other evidence were covered over.

Harrell was arrested and brought up on several charges, including murder, but the DA later reduced the charges to include manslaughter. The DA handed the case to a Grand Jury, which returned a finding of No Bill.

He also had a run-in with local law enforcement when he was a boy. Some older bigger kids started harassing him while he was walking home from school and started making threats of beating him up. After several minutes of the leader threatening to beat him up with his friends standing ready behind him, Harrell took his hands out of his pockets and maced the leader and his friends in the face. They ran off crying but, according to Harrell, they or their parents called the local police first, before he got home to report it and so the police supposedly threatened him with legal action, but it never went beyond threats, and as a result Harrell is a big proponent of being the first one to file a police report when a defensive incident takes place... although IIRC, he decided not to file a report after he and his hunting group were fired on because he didn't feel he had enough details to bother tying up the sheriff's office in the jurisdiction it took place in.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Modern Day Savage,

Modern Day Savage, as I believe you know, I greatly respect your posts and what else I have come to learn about you via the forum. I originally intended to ignore this thread and any comments that seemed to be in response to my evidently … controversial post. But because you addressed me directly I will respond directly. This explanation is, however, in response primarily to the other posters’ comments, not yours.

I have limited interests and especially tend to avoid personality cults. To cite just one example, it was only when I saw the report here of the incident involving him that I ever so much as heard Alec Baldwin’s name, much less knew anything about his acting career and even less about his attitudes toward gun rights. When I know nothing about people like him and countless others who hold so much fascination for most Americans, I don’t believe it should be surprising that I was unfamiliar with Mr. Harrell and his background and his other activities. Now that I have been introduced to him, I may see what else he has to say about topics that actually interest me, unlike the antics of jesters and other entertainers that occupy so much of most people’s lives.

The Internet is awash with statements, videos, etc., by countless personalities who strive to attract our attention for various reasons. If I were to spend time to not only pay some degree of attention to what they present directly, but also to conduct the research necessary to learn their biographies, I would waste far more than the time I do now in absorbing a tiny fraction of the firehose output of information aimed at anyone who spends time on the ’net.

But in addition to my having neither the time nor the inclination to research the bios of the presenters of every video I watch, the more important reason for the criticism I posted about that particular video is because of the logical fallacy known as the “argument from authority.” In short, that fallacy is falling into the trap of believing someone merely because of who he is, not because of the facts and/or logic of what he says. A smart person will recognize the fallacy when it’s the obvious example of a movie actor’s pontificating about international politics or gun control and self-defense topics, but it becomes harder when someone is offering an opinion about a matter that he has had some exposure to.

Long ago I responded to a member here who often cited his involvement in three LE shootings as evidence he was an expert on gunfights. I finally had enough and pointed out that we wouldn’t call a pastry cook an expert on soufflés after having baked three of them. The individuals involved in both situations no doubt know more about actual gunfights and soufflés than I do, but do they know as much as people with vastly more experience with either such as the chef at a Michelin 3-star restaurant or someone like Jim Cirillo?

And that brings me to the criticism I made about Mr. Harrell’s advice about gunfighting tactics, and specifically attempting to engage the head when using a low-powered handgun. I am far from being the first commentator to note the disadvantages of doing that: The head tends to be in greater motion than other vital parts of the body; it’s much smaller than other vital parts of the body; humans have very good reflexes when protecting the head, and if a threat is perceived, such as something being pointed at the head, we tend to move it very quickly; and the skull is the best armor the body has for protecting a vital part of the body. Regarding the last, the forensic pathology literature is full of accounts of bullets’ hitting the skull and not penetrating. That’s obviously most common with low-powered projectiles, but one account I read just recently reported that it had happened with a 40 Smith and Wesson bullet.

In addition, Mr. Harrell’s shooting performance when demonstrating why we should shoot at the head was hardly confidence inspiring. If he had managed to put five shots into a quarter-sized group in the center of the head from 7 yards in two seconds, I would have been impressed by his skills, but my immediate reaction would have been, “Yes, but how many other people can do that—especially other people who are foolish enough to rely on something like a 25 Auto for self-defense?”

Experience matters, but only if it’s relevant to the issue at hand. If Mr. Harrell had been in a couple of dozen defensive shootings in which he used a 25 Auto, and half the time he aimed at the torso and half at the head, and then discovered that aiming for the head was a better tactic, I would be willing to ask myself if I were mistaken in my opinion—at least for someone as skilled as he.

I doubt many people will bother to read all this, but for anyone who does, the point I’m trying to make is that what matters most when someone offers an opinion are the facts and logic of that opinion, not the person who renders it. That is, unfortunately, a very common mistake we humans make, but it does not change the fact that it’s a mistake more often than not.

All that being said, I do appreciate the opportunity to make Mr. Harrell’s virtual acquaintance, so thanks for all the information about him. I, too, appreciate people who present their YouTube views in a non-histrionic manner; I have turned off countless videos within the first few seconds for that reason. And now that I have added one more to my list of They who must not be criticized here, I’ll be more discreet about my own future opinions. I don’t post them to deliberately offend anyone.

I don't know if the article I'm about to link has been posted elsewhere. This was the main thread on the incident, so it belongs here.

Apparently the investigation has been completed and more detailed information released. It changes the narrative slightly, but not the basics (an armed citizen taking down an intended mass murderer.) However, people can stop shooting ten shot strings at fixed targets at 40 yards. it wasn't that simple.

https://www.americas1stfreedom...s-praised-by-police/

“True Hero” Eli Dicken Cleared of Charges, Praised by Police

by DAVID BURNETT posted on January 3, 2023

No charges will be filed against Elisjsha Dicken, the 22-year-old armed citizen who stopped a mass murderer at an Indiana mall earlier this year.

The announcement came during a press conference on Dec. 21, where Greenwood Police Department Chief James Ison released new details about the perpetrator, and praised Dicken as “a true hero.”

Of the shooter, Ison painted a familiar picture of an anti-social loner who was estranged from his family and had a record of juvenile offenses. In fact, this individual had a spiraling history of online obsession with Nazi Germany and mass murderers.

An ex-girlfriend, who said she wasn’t surprised to learn of the killings, described prior abusive behaviors from this person, such as putting a gun in her mouth during an argument. She said that if he ever killed himself, he would take others with him. Others around him reportedly “joked” that he was “the school-shooter type.” The FBI had received a tip about his online account in 2019, but never located its owner.

Notably, when discussing mass murderers online, the killer had previously written that mass murderers select places where armed citizens can’t carry. “Gun-free zones are a recent phenomenon that by definition cause them to be easy targets,” the individual wrote.

According to police reports, three months prior to the act, the murderer purchased two AR-15 rifles and ammunition. A month before the killings, he had quit his job and, because his father had withdrawn financial support, was about to be evicted. Shortly prior to the murders, he disabled his apartment’s smoke detectors and burned his laptop inside an oven with a butane tank. (Police speculate this may have been an attempt to divert the public safety response.) An hour before the killings, the murderer posted a photo of himself holding a gun to his head and saying it was “a good day to die.”

The murderer then placed both rifles, four loaded magazines and a handgun inside a backpack, walked to the Greenwood Park Mall, and proceeded directly to the food-court bathroom. He spent an hour in the bathroom using the public wi-fi for activities such as searching for his ex-girlfriend online. Shortly before the mall closed, the murderer dropped his cell phone into the toilet, emerged from the bathroom at 5:56 p.m. and began shooting people. The first person he encountered, Victor Gomez, also happened to be carrying concealed that day, but was ambushed at point blank and never had a chance. The shooter then fired at nearby diners Pedro and Rosa Pinedo before firing indiscriminately into the food court.

One of those at risk of being shot was Elisjsha Dicken.

Dicken had come to the food court with his girlfriend for dinner, and was seated next to a column and trash can. The instant the shots rang out, Dicken pushed his girlfriend to the ground, drew his Glock 19, braced himself on the trash can and opened fire at a distance of 42 yards. At this distance, Dicken fired four times, hitting the murderer twice, with Dicken pausing only when panicked shoppers ran through his line of sight.

The injured murderer, rifle still in hand, retreated towards the bathroom. Dicken closed to within 20 yards and shot the murderer with another four shots. The murderer started to go down, but was still struggling to make it to the bathroom. Concerned for potential further carnage, Dicken closed in to about 25 feet and fired twice more. The murderer slumped over and didn’t move.

An unarmed mall security guard then ran up. Dicken told the guard what happened, and the guard intercepted and briefed arriving officers.

“There is no doubt in my mind that Eli Dicken saved many, many lives that night,” Chief Ison told reporters. “He is a true hero.”

America’s 1st Freedom caught up with Eli’s attorney, Guy Relford, as he was retrieving Eli’s handgun from police custody, to learn more about the Greenwood Mall hero.

“Eli is a somewhat shy, really hard-working, all-American man,” Relford explains. “He’s someone who doesn’t want the spotlight. He’s got a really good job as an auto mechanic; he has a girlfriend that he loves; and he really wants to get back to the life he had before the shooting. He knows that he saved lives and he appreciates the accolades and the thanks that he’s gotten. At the same time, he’s still struggling with the idea that he was forced into taking a human life. That’s a big thing for anyone who values human life as Eli does. He’s still coming to grips with that.”

Did he have any special training? “Zero,” Relford says. “Eli was taught by his grandfather how to shoot when he was just nine or ten. That was really it. After the events of 2020, and when he became eligible, he got a permit to carry. He actually didn’t need it because we passed constitutional carry this year, but he had it, and carried as part of his routine, thank God.”

Officers say it only took seconds for Dicken to stop the murderer.

By all indications, there was nothing special about Dicken. He was just a young car mechanic with a Glock. No specialized training. No formal preparation. No fancy equipment. His magazine was loaded with full metal jacket Blazer brass ammunition, and his pistol sights had actually been mangled in a motorcycle accident, weeks prior, and been filed down to make them functional again.

“Having seen the video and seen the results, I have one theory, and it’s that the hand of God was on Eli,” Relford says.

There were also no flagrant warnings or actionable “red flags” for the killer’s behavior. He left no manifesto and no obvious motives. He gave no obvious indications to mall patrons of his impending murder spree, and entered the mall unobserved. “The fact of the matter is, it can happen anywhere,” Chief Ison noted. “When someone makes up their mind to do something evil like this, it’s really hard to stop. I don’t know how you stop that, short of putting metal detectors at every entrance. Sometimes all we can hope for is an Eli Dicken to be in the right place at the right time.”

quote:

I doubt many people will bother to read all this, but for anyone who does, the point I’m trying to make is that what matters most when someone offers an opinion are the facts and logic of that opinion, not the person who renders it. That is, unfortunately, a very common mistake we humans make, but it does not change the fact that it’s a mistake more often than not.

You are right of course. One thing that occurred to me is that the more experience and education one has, the better equipped he or she is to evaluate the facts and logic presented. I know that in my own experience information learned on this forum and in and around various classes has made me much better prepared to separate the wheat from the chaff in things presented on the Net.
Back in the ‘90s when I worked in high tech we used to say only half jokingly that you could find anything on the Internet, but at least 95% of what you’d find would be pure B.S. I doubt it has changed much since.

quote:

He was just a young car mechanic with a Glock. No specialized training. No formal preparation. No fancy equipment. His magazine was loaded with full metal jacket Blazer brass ammunition, and his pistol sights had actually been mangled in a motorcycle accident, weeks prior, and been filed down to make them functional again.

Time for new sights and better ammo.

And at the top of this page it's reported he had Federal ammo. Now Blazer (CCI). I don't know what to believe.

BBMW,
Thank you for posting this article.

To me, the most impressive thing about Eli is not that he engaged the shooter, but he closed in on the shooter during the event.
I believe this type of action was once called courage.

Happened in July last year. Took them this long to clear him? WTH?