Discussion: DC Police Chief To Public: Best Way To Save Lives Is To Take Gunman Down

TPM Article Topics
1

Discussion for article #243124

2

Nothing said about depriving the mad gun wielding psychopath the ability to procure a gun in the first place.

8 Likes
3

“Your options are run, hide, or fight,” Lanier told Anderson Cooper on CBS’ “60 Minutes.”

But if you choose to fight, we may not know you are a good guy with a gun, so…sorry in advance.

8 Likes
4

Uncle Ruckus is going to use this as validation. Remember Uncle Ruckus said he would have taken the shooter on in Arizona. I think it was Arizona…

1 Like
5

“If you’re in a position to try and take the gunman down, to take the gunman out, it’s the best option for saving lives before police can get there.”

Let the mayhem begin.

Real life Liam Neesons (a la’ Taken film franchise) or Matt Damons (a la’ Bourne film franchise) aren’t just waiting around in crowds waiting for some crazed killer to appear so they can “take gunman down.”

2 Likes
6

YOU take him down. I’m gonna run and hide.

5 Likes
8 
  "We've never told people, 'Take action.' It's a different -- this is a different scenario."

If that’s not a license … I don’t know what is ----

9

She’s encouraging vigilantism. No wanna be is going to limit the license they perceive in that talk to just an “active shooter”. She has to be daft to think that. She’s telling folks to take the law in their own hands and using a gun is OK. There is a reason “they used to not do that”. Because its nuts and until “nuts” began to influence thinking law enforcement pros not a one would make such a recommendation. This woman has stopped being a lawman and is now a political shill.

Blood will soon be on her hands.

2 Likes
10

“And that’s, you know, that’s kind of counterintuitive to what cops always tell people, right? We always tell people, ‘Don’t, you know, don’t take action. Call 911. Don’t intervene in the robbery,’” she continued. “We’ve never told people, ‘Take action.’ It’s a different – this is a different scenario.”

It’s really, incredibly sad that this needs to even be said at all, but what she’s saying is true, particularly in a country that refuses to deal with deal the real problem. As long as America is content to sit on her fat ass demanding more guns and less regulation the killings will undoubtedly continue.

6 Likes
12

The chief is absolutely right. In a robbery situation if the bad guy pulls a gun, give him what he asks for and he probably won’t shoot. Good advice.

In an active shooter situation the shooter is going to shoot you. Your best chances to survive are to run away, to hide or to fight, Sitting there like a good little lump just gives the shooter a nicer target. Also good advice.

If you don’t have a gun, and you can’t run away or hide, use what you have to fight. You might not save yourself, but maybe that little kid in his mothers arms in the next chair will remember you when he grows up.

4 Likes
13

I’m sorry, how obvious is that? What exactly are the OTHER choices? Someone got paid for writing that?

14

Gun rights advocates often argue that armed residents can help thwart crime.
But law enforcement officials say that at least twice in recent days, armed
bystanders have gone a big step beyond that, shooting at fleeing shoplifters
who posed no immediate danger.
On Tuesday, prosecutors charged a woman with a misdemeanor for firing
at a getaway vehicle in the parking lot of a Home Depot in Auburn Hills, Mich.
And the police in Elkhart, Ind., said they were looking into whether to bring
charges against a man who did much the same thing there on Monday. No one
was hurt in either shooting.
In each case, the person with the gun was a customer who was licensed to
carry a concealed weapon, saw store employees chasing shoplifters and fired
as they drove off. In the Michigan case, the Oakland County prosecutor,
Jessica R. Cooper, charged Tatiana Duva­Rodriguez with one count of reckless
use, handling or discharge of a firearm.
“If this is proven, I find it very disturbing that someone would take out
their gun in a busy parking lot and shoot at the tires of a passing car,” Ms.
Cooper said. “Once fired, the bullet could have easily ricocheted or fragmented
and injured or killed someone else.”

In Iran they stone you to death for adultery. In the United States you can get gunned down for shoplifting a couple packages of "D" cell batteries. And we're the more advanced society...........
1 Like
15

In the situations described, commissioned police officers would have been equally guilty of reckless discharge of a firearm. Every state has different requirements for issuing a conceal carry permit. Many states don’t require any training at all. Others are better. CCW is very popular in much of the country, at a minimum you should demand your state to require serious training before issuing a permit.

1 Like
16

Sanity is not an option.

1 Like
17

Back in the day, it was Charles Bronson. I’m glad to see that the torch has been passed.

18

People certainly have stopped shooters and would-be shooters. Very lucky people have done that. But when you get down to specific scenarios, well, if three guys who are ready to die themselves enter a theater with full-auto AKs and start shooting, I don’t see how you survive by fighting. And I don’t think having a Glock .40 under your sweater changes the equation much. Even if you hit one guy, which would be miraculous for an untrained civilian in mortal terror with everyone screaming and running around you, pistol slugs often fail to slow the bad guy down. He’s still got you vastly outgunned, and he has two friends with him and it’s probably the day your story ends.

2 Likes
19

Whenever this comes up, I wonder: what is the appropriate penalty for a “good guy with a gun” that kills an innocent bystander?

Do we differentiate between someone who was not armed to begin with and picked up a gun and used it spontaneously, versus someone who “exercising their constitutional rights” was already carrying?

1 Like
20

This is a highly misleading piece and does not properly explain the run, hide, or fight strategy. I teach Community College where guns are not allowed on campus (yet anyway). I walked the class through the strategy. The FIRST option is to RUN. If that is not a feasible option, the SECOND option is to HIDE. Now imagine that neither of those are feasible. We are hiding in the classroom as best we can, but we know by sound that the gunman is heading our way. Then and only then do you FIGHT because you have run out of options. And that does not necessarily mean with guns. It means with whatever you have at your disposal. You rush the gunman with trash can, chairs, whatever is available.

This piece is lousy journalism on a vitally important issue.

5 Likes
21

That isn’t what she’s saying, imo. What she’s saying is that IF running and hiding isn’t an option (the gunman shoots up a windowless room or a room on the fifth floor, for instance) your best bet is try to rush the shooter and stop him. I don’t get the impression she’s necessarily talking about shooting the shooter or being personally armed. I think she’s merely stating that folks might have a better shot at survival if they can take down the shooter when running and hiding isn’t an option.

2 Likes
22

Right?

And how about good guy with gun #2?

How will be/she know who the original shooter is and who is the “hero”?

And what about good guy #3?

Cascade of “heroes” killing “heroes” until police arrive to finish off the last “hero”?

Seems this is exactly why the “well regulated” language was in the 2nd amendment was looking to avoid…

2 Likes