Mass Shootings in the US

According to the LA Times, during an encounter with police in April "They called in mental health professionals to evaluate him, and they concluded he did not need to be taken into custody."
He also put a round through the wall of his domicile. It was mentioned that he had an altercation at the same bar at some time prior to this incident. So only time will tell to figure out what the motive was.
He used a Glock so my money is on a 21. The big question is where did he get the smoke from?? That aided him tremendously.
 
He also put a round through the wall of his domicile. It was mentioned that he had an altercation at the same bar at some time prior to this incident. So only time will tell to figure out what the motive was.
He used a Glock so my money is on a 21. The big question is where did he get the smoke from?? That aided him tremendously.
It was bought legally, so take your pick.
 
The pistol yes.
My question concerns the smoke grenades he used. If they were M18's, then it will be important to know where he got them.
A statement from the Sheriff a little while ago said they still haven't found evidence smoke grenades were used.
 
Out here in Wyomingstan we are pretty heavily armed and we have a very high veteran population. Looking like a tacticool operator just confirms to most people that you are more likely armed and thus a higher priority to kill. So first impressions are very important and sticking out like that can be very negative. If you can't back up the image you could very well be fooked. Besides Wranglers and Carhartt convey a less threatening, very friendly Redneck image which does not stick out like a sore thumb.
Quote taken from another thread but I'm confused. Earlier you and SamtheBam were busy arguing that most of Wyoming's murders are domestic violence (Sam claimed around 90% of all murders in the state). Now you seem to be claiming that wearing military or tactical gear gets you shot.

Unless it's the women wearing tactical gear at home that get murdered by their husbands?
 
Quote taken from another thread but I'm confused. Earlier you and SamtheBam were busy arguing that most of Wyoming's murders are domestic violence (Sam claimed around 90% of all murders in the state). Now you seem to be claiming that wearing military or tactical gear gets you shot.

Unless it's the women wearing tactical gear at home that get murdered by their husbands?
No.
The tacticool operator clothing sticks out like a sore thumb. When people are doing a threat analysis (scoping out everybody in the area) dressing up like a contractor or openly carrying tends to put you on top of the threat list. Dressing up like a Hick with Wranglers, and Carhartt etc does not convey a threatening image to most other people or LE etc. First impressions tend to be fairly important.

In short it just called the Grey Man concept.
 
"Target" is a vague notion at best with these shooters. The target is usually anyone withing sight of the shooter regardless of who they are. Most of them have committed suicide as soon as the police got close enough to engage.

Active shooter training has evolved since Columbine and still evolves. I will tell students that it boils down to "Find Fooker, Shoot Fooker", or more professionally put, "Move to the sound of gunfire and immediately engage". Post-Columbine called for gathering 4 officers and move. that has changed as it was still wasting time waiting for the extra bodies to arrive. Now it's take what you got even if it's just you and go!

It's difficult to teach people that as l0ong as you hear gunfire, you have to move to towards it, don't stop to check every corner, don't stop to treat casualties, that's the work of the follow-on forces. Your job as the first in is to find the shooter and stop him, whether it's shooting him or getting him to do the deed himself.
If this is the US and you just go straight in, how do you know which tooled-up lunatic with a gun to shoot? After all, there are supposedly all these armed polite people going after the bad guy on their own initiative presenting you with the potential problem of sorting out who shot who and who starting shooting first.

I'm not taking a pop at you, I'm just pointing out the potential problem when concept 'A' (everyone is armed and ready to go off half cocked) runs into concept 'B' (police rush in and look for someone with a gun).
 
No.
The tacticool operator clothing sticks out like a sore thumb. When people are doing a threat analysis (scoping out everybody in the area) dressing up like a contractor or openly carrying tends to put you on top of the threat list. Dressing up like a Hick with Wranglers, and Carhartt etc does not convey a threatening image to most other people or LE etc. First impressions tend to be fairly important.
Fair enough. I've wandered about in London wearing DPM trousers back in my poor student days and never thought about it.

I'm just amused at the mental disconnect between 'my state is really safe and London is far worse' and 'we all need guns to protect ourselves and wearing camouflage clothing is really dangerous'.
 
If this is the US and you just go straight in, how do you know which tooled-up lunatic with a gun to shoot? After all, there are supposedly all these armed polite people going after the bad guy on their own initiative presenting you with the potential problem of sorting out who shot who and who starting shooting first.

I'm not taking a pop at you, I'm just pointing out the potential problem when concept 'A' (everyone is armed and ready to go off half cocked) runs into concept 'B' (police rush in and look for someone with a gun).
It's a valid point. Only flaw is that this is the 7,625,245th time the the 'good guy with a gun' failed to show up.
 
Fair enough. I've wandered about in London wearing DPM trousers back in my poor student days and never thought about it.

I'm just amused at the mental disconnect between 'my state is really safe and London is far worse' and 'we all need guns to protect ourselves and wearing camouflage clothing is really dangerous'.
Well nobody out your way has concealed carry permits (not that you need it here) and are actively carrying handguns either.

Certain types of camouflage are fine. The hunting patterns from Cabelas etc are an example. 02 Octane or MODB are not something that will draw attention.



Dressing up like you are going to war tends convey the wrong image. I believe the airsoft crowd would be a great example.
 
Well nobody out your way has concealed carry permits (not that you need it here) and are actively carrying handguns either.
Just so we are quite clear - is wearing the 'wrong' type of camouflage in Wyoming dangerous or not? Are concealed carry shooters likely to put a 9mm hole in my head for wearing it?
 
Just so we are quite clear - is wearing the 'wrong' type of camouflage in Wyoming dangerous or not? Are concealed carry shooters likely to put a 9mm hole in my head for wearing it?
No, but it does make you stick out unnecessarily to the rest of the public and LE. It's called profiling. Wearing camo elk hunting does not draw unwanted attention, dressing up like a Marine at Target does raise a few eyebrows.
 
Moved to the correct thread:

Somehow I wish I could help you understand that the 2nd Amendment is a right.
Oh, I understand that. You seem to have the opinion that a document written a long long time ago should remain unaltered despite the world for which it was written changing beyond recognition.

I think it needs review, and dare I say, amendment.

Your attitude stinks.
 
h, I understand that. You seem to have the opinion that a document written a long long time ago should remain unaltered despite the world for which it was written changing beyond recognition.
He seems perfectly open to it being amended, even if it does mean removing some constitutionally-guaranteed rights. Just so long as it's not amending an amendment he likes.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Top