What happened to the bullets?

[thrasherfox]

Soooo.

I was talking to someone the other day about the Arizona shooting.

And I had mentioned about the one guy who was interviewed who had a handgun. And I mentioned about how the guy seemed to do everything right.


The guy (I was talking with) said he hadn't heard about him, so I explained how the guy heard the shots being fired, he came out of the store (walgreens?) and he saw a guy with a gun. He immediately palmed his gun but he noticed the gun the other guy was holding had the slide locked back, meaning he had expended all of this ammunition out of the gun.

So instead of drawing his gun, since he could tell the other guy was empty, he ran up and grabbed the guys arm. And never once removing his firearm

At which time people around them said this guy wasn't the shooter, and he then saw the shooter being taken down.

And the other guy looks at me and says "so, where did all of these rounds go that the guy fired?"

an I paused and I said "hmmmm the shooter was never hit was he?"

And the other guy said "nope"

And the other guy said to me "I wonder with all the people who were shot, wounded and killed, were they all from the shooters gun or did some people accidentally get shot by the good guy who was trying to shoot the shooter?


So this has been kind of bothering me ever since I had this discussion with this guy.


from the story I have heard, there was a good guy who had fired and emptied all of his rounds into the crowd trying to shoot the bad guy.

Said bad guy was never hit.

numerous casualties.



Anyone know or think or wonder if maybe all the people shot were not all victims of the shooter and that maybe some became collateral damage?


Where did the bullets go?

Does anyone know if autopsy all showed all rounds were from the bad guys gun? or did some people die of bullet wounds that were not from the shooters gun?



and anyone think there might have possible been others that tried to shoot this guy and when it was all over just put their firearm back?

It was a police officer I was talking to about this. And I asked him what was his opinion lets say if that happened in California and someone was their and they were carrying, had a CCW what did he feel that persons responsibility was?

And he said he would hope the person would do the right thing and try and take the bad guy out. But he said if a person is ever in a situation like that, it is something to seriously take into consideration.


I am glad I had this conversation with this officer. Because while I feel in the moment I would hope I would take something like that into consideration, I think having that conversation has kind of put it more into the forefront of my mind, so if I ever am in a situation like that it will help me be more aware of my surroundings.


Thoughts? comments?

Anyone know anything more about the Arizona shooting in regards to this?

[tonelar]

you're confused; check your sources again. all the firing done at that scene was by the bad guy.
the gun that our ccw guy saw in the hand of the other good guy was the one taken from the shooter.

[rromeo]

Huh? Joe Zamudio did not shoot anybody.

[thrasherfox]

you're confused; check your sources again. all the firing done at that scene was by the bad guy.
the gun that our ccw guy saw in the hand of the other good guy was the one taken from the shooter.

I wouldn't consider myself confused. Misinformed maybe

The source I am referring to was the video of the CCW guy.

I will see if I can find some more information on it.

[tonelar]

Ok. You're misinformed, the guy you were talking to was probably uninformed. You two getting together, confused the event further in your mind. I read the same papers and online news coverage and this is what I came away with;

The gun Zamudio spotted in the hand of one of the heroes that day with it's slide locked back was the one he took from the Bad Guy. Zamudio's handgun is the only other gun in the story and it stays out of play the whole time.

The video you're talking about sounds like one of Zamudio's interviews. Where he states what he saw as he approached the scene, made contact with the Good Guy and then his attention gets re-focused onto the BG.

[Citadelonline]

...from the story I have heard, there was a good guy who had fired and emptied all of his rounds into the crowd trying to shoot the bad guy.

Let's use some practical logic here instead of armchair quarterbacking.

If anyone had fired any shots while or after the shooter emptied his gun, at least one of the 30 or so people in attendance who were not wounded, and possibly some that were, would have noticed a second gunman and a second volley of shots being fired.

Secondly, whether he stated it publicly or not, you can rest assured that Joe Zamudio, (The "alleged" second shooter) was interviewed by authorities as to his actions before, during and after the shooting, and I have no doubt his firearm was inspected for expended rounds at some point. Your police officer friend should at least be aware of that, SOP.

Does anyone know if autopsy all showed all rounds were from the bad guys gun? or did some people die of bullet wounds that were not from the shooters gun?

In a shooting of this magnitude, an FBI attested autopsy/ballistics/forensics investigation would have revealed any discrepancies.
There was one shooter responsible for this tragedy and everyone knows who he is.

No disrespect to the OP, but this "second shooter" claptrap is right out of the liberal anti-gun playbook. They've been trying, unsuccessfully, to demonize the rightful and responsible actions that Mr. Zamudio took as "almost causing a second tragedy by nearly shooting everyone" (their words) and attacking Arizona's right to carry as the evil that was responsible for the actions of a mentally disturbed individual.

If it was really a police officer who was telling you this, I hope he he's not in my jurisdiction.

[thrasherfox]

You know, I dont know why all of you guys have to be so agressive and confrontational. I start a fricken thread trying to get clarification on something I was "confused" about. and instead of people politley correcting me everyone has to be a jerk about it.

Wow, chill put people. maybe trying to be friendly and providing friendly correction would be a little nicer.

And I never said anything about Zamudio being mistaken as a second shooter. I watched his interview and i was impressed on how he handled the situation.

And to pass judgement on me or a police officer based on a simple question I raised is absolutly ridciculous.

And I am not a fricken liberal and it pisses me off to be called one

Mods, please feel free to delete this thread, apparently I was confused and the reply's only go to show intolerance of certain people on this board which I do not feel reflects well on this board

[Whiterabbit]

FYI I'm batting about 100% on topics I've started here that get saturated with hate from other people. #1 reason I never start a topic on calguns unless I have absolutely no other alternative for information, and the #1 reason I'll never publicly associate myself with this forum. As a suggestion, I respond to all the hate by not responding and letting the thread die. The hate is just something that is a part of the community here.

And the other guy said to me "I wonder with all the people who were shot, wounded and killed, were they all from the shooters gun or did some people accidentally get shot by the good guy who was trying to shoot the shooter?


So this has been kind of bothering me ever since I had this discussion with this guy.

Noone else fired. This sad story is a demonstration of responsible carry. How many folks do you think were carrying there? We'll never know the true answer. And noone else fired? why?

Because the lawful carriers know that there's a reason firing squads don't stand in circles.

[Decoligny]

You know, I dont know why all of you guys have to be so agressive and confrontational. I start a fricken thread trying to get clarification on something I was "confused" about. and instead of people politley correcting me everyone has to be a jerk about it.

Wow, chill put people. maybe trying to be friendly and providing friendly correction would be a little nicer.

And I never said anything about Zamudio being mistaken as a second shooter. I watched his interview and i was impressed on how he handled the situation.

And to pass judgement on me or a police officer based on a simple question I raised is absolutly ridciculous.

And I am not a fricken liberal and it pisses me off to be called one

Mods, please feel free to delete this thread, apparently I was confused and the reply's only go to show intolerance of certain people on this board which I do not feel reflects well on this board

Someone seem a little bit touchy. We apologize if you have been offended in any way. Please put on some soothing new age music and sip a cup of warm herbal tea.

I just read through all the replies, and they were mostly stating the facts of what actually happened.

One individual made a comment about how "liberal media" tried to invent a "second shooter" scenario: No disrespect to the OP, but this "second shooter" claptrap is right out of the liberal anti-gun playbook. They've been trying, unsuccessfully, to demonize the rightful and responsible actions that Mr. Zamudio took as "almost causing a second tragedy by nearly shooting everyone" (their words) and attacking Arizona's right to carry as the evil that was responsible for the actions of a mentally disturbed individual.

As you can see above, he was denouncing the liberal media, not you. Apparently the second shooter comments made by antis may have colored your friend's initial understanding of the facts and led to his erroneous assumption that the guy who had the gun with the slide locked back was holding his own gun, and not the empty gun that he had taken off the bad guy.

[Backcountry]

Thrasher, you are confused, misinformed, argumentative, and have your panties twisted way too tight. Get over yourself.

[coyotebait]

Someone seem a little bit touchy. We apologize is you have been offended. Please put on some soothing music and sip a cup of warm herbal tea.

I just read through all the replies, and they were mostly stating the facts of what actually happened.

One individual made a comment about how "liberal media" tried to invent a "second shooter" scenario: No disrespect to the OP, but this "second shooter" claptrap is right out of the liberal anti-gun playbook. They've been trying, unsuccessfully, to demonize the rightful and responsible actions that Mr. Zamudio took as "almost causing a second tragedy by nearly shooting everyone" (their words) and attacking Arizona's right to carry as the evil that was responsible for the actions of a mentally disturbed individual.

As you can see above, he was denouncing the liberal media, not you. Apparently the second shooter comments made by antis may have colored your friend's initial understanding of the facts and led to his erroneous assumption that the guy who had the gun with the slide locked back was holding his own gun, and not the empty gun that he had taken off the bad guy.

I find your typing in pink offensive and aggressive.

[rromeo]

You know, I dont know why all of you guys have to be so agressive and confrontational. I start a fricken thread trying to get clarification on something I was "confused" about. and instead of people politley correcting me everyone has to be a jerk about it.

Wow, chill put people. maybe trying to be friendly and providing friendly correction would be a little nicer.

And I never said anything about Zamudio being mistaken as a second shooter. I watched his interview and i was impressed on how he handled the situation.

And to pass judgement on me or a police officer based on a simple question I raised is absolutly ridciculous.

And I am not a fricken liberal and it pisses me off to be called one

Mods, please feel free to delete this thread, apparently I was confused and the reply's only go to show intolerance of certain people on this board which I do not feel reflects well on this board

Did some posts get deleted? Where are the aggressive and confrontational posts?

[pTa]

I wasin Phoenix when this happend and the news was all about lookout for rthe shooters accomplise. Maybe TFox heard some of that misinformations prior to learning the final brake down of the event.

tunrs out they were looking for the taxidrive who dropped the perp off so no shooter

I dont see any responsse removed but if you are unsure you mite take some of the forummembers to be rash/ but if you just analyze the responces i do think youll see poeple just dont put enough smilies or whatevr on thei r posts

how does my post look to you/ i know i cant spell an try an type to fast but do you feel mine is any type of atack it is not

have a nice day and thanku for serving

[Citadelonline]

You know, I dont know why all of you guys have to be so agressive and confrontational. I start a fricken thread trying to get clarification on something I was "confused" about. and instead of people politley correcting me everyone has to be a jerk about it.

Wow, chill put people. maybe trying to be friendly and providing friendly correction would be a little nicer.

And I never said anything about Zamudio being mistaken as a second shooter. I watched his interview and i was impressed on how he handled the situation.

And to pass judgement on me or a police officer based on a simple question I raised is absolutly ridciculous.

And I am not a fricken liberal and it pisses me off to be called one

Mods, please feel free to delete this thread, apparently I was confused and the reply's only go to show intolerance of certain people on this board which I do not feel reflects well on this board

I don't think anyone is being a "jerk."
You asked:

Thoughts? comments?

Anyone know anything more about the Arizona shooting in regards to this?

I can only speak for myself, but these were the questions and I gave my reply. Sorry if you don't like the answers, but If you are inferring that I accused you of being an anti gun liberal, you are wrong. I don't even know you and would never make that kind of assumption based on a few words on an internet forum. If you believe my reply was aggressive or confrontational, or it was taken that way, then I apologize as that was not my intent. What I did intend was to help let people be aware that the left is misusing this incident to further their agenda. It helps the entire sporting gun community when we are all well informed, including myself.

No one knows all the answers, even if it may seem that way sometimes.

You asked a legitimate question, and it deserves a legitimate answer.

Best,
C.O.

[Grumpyoldretiredcop]

To answer your question in a more straightforward manner: There was no collateral damage as Mr. Zamudio made the correct decisions - there was no clear line of fire and no clear backstop. Those are two of the three decisions one must make in order to use a deadly weapon to protect their life or the life of another. The first one, of course, is whether the situation observed justifies the use of deadly force at all.

Mr. Zamudio made all three decisions correctly. That, in itself, entitles him to be called "hero". Any idiot can run into a scene, blazing away, without thought. It's a lot harder to make the decision not to shoot IMO. Evaluating the situation and making those decisions correctly, again IMO, is the responsibility of a CCW holder in a similar situation, whether in CA or anywhere in the U.S. There is no obligation to intervene, however, on the part of a CCW holder.

Is it possible that others at the scene drew weapons, made the same decisions, and reholstered? Certainly... but that's just speculation. I have heard or read nothing that indicates that might have been the case. There has been no indication that anyone other than the accused shooter fired. While LE will do their best to collect all available evidence, that evidence may not be conclusive one way or the other. The science of forensic ballistics is nothing like most people imagine it. Not surprising since most people form their opinions from TV shows like CSI. Once a bullet penetrates a wall or rebounds from pavement or other solid surfaces, it's often impossible to state whether there is a possibility that it was fired from a given weapon. Sometimes it's even impossible to determine caliber. We may never conclusively know the answer to that question.