Truth about Guns simulates Charlie Hebdo attack

[sofbak]

A group called The Truth About Guns organized Tuesday a simulation of last week's terrorist attack in Paris, CBS Dallas station KTVT-TV reports.

The group hoped to learn how things may have played out differently at French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo or any other mass shooting.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/paris-terror-attack-simulation-conducted-in-texas-by-gun-group/

Not sure about the participants skill levels, but the results were not too encouraging:

Time and time again, the armed civilian "dies" - shot by a round that marks him or her with paint.

In only two cases volunteers were able to take out one of the two gunmen in the process.
.......

Twelve volunteers participated in the exercise. Only one survived after running away. No one was able to take out both shooters.

[Bansh88]

Cool story, CBS!
I'm assuming they handed 12 people whom have never touched a firearm before. Or had SEAL memebers as the bad guys. 12 people with guns vs 2 should have pretty good odds with even minimum experience.

[d4v0s]

Ok, so in this situation it may not have helped much, I can understand that.

But what most everyone forgets, it is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees. I also take that further into these arguments. I would rather have been shot and killed defending myself and my coworkers, than to passively accept my fate...

I always see Antis comments, and I can see right through them, they are all piss ants that have given up on the warrior spirit... I have even had talks with them where they openly admit that they would just give a car thief their wallet, money, and keys and just let them go. The whole time I stand there shaking my head thinking "your wife, your young daughter.. you really think a scumbag like that is just going to stop at your material possessions. Its your ****ing job to protect them".

[caliberetta]

When you are the target of more than one assailant who have the element of surprise in their favor, survival, even when armed, is going to be beyond difficult.

[shda5582]

Cool story, CBS!
I'm assuming they handed 12 people whom have never touched a firearm before. Or had SEAL memebers as the bad guys. 12 people with guns vs 2 should have pretty good odds with even minimum experience.

Pretty much this. They had trained people be the bad guys, but no word on the skill level of the good guys so we don't even know if there was a CCW'er on the "victim" team.

[kaligaran]

So in their own example, sometimes the bad guys dies, the good guy died anyway.

I'd rather take my chances with a gun than be fish in a barrel.

[HibikiR]

TTAG reports that the simulation is supposed to continue, if 12 rounds of 1v2 didn't work then 2v2, if 12 rounds of 2v2 doesn't work then 3v2, etc.

Of course lamestream media doesn't mention how the test is still in progress and instead tries to hammer down the idea that good, armed people can't make a difference.

[viet4lifeOC]

. But what most everyone forgets, it is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees. I also take that further into these arguments. I would rather have been shot and killed defending myself and my coworkers, than to passively accept my fate...

This

[SuperSet]

If a kill team showed up at your office with AKs, you're probably going to lose, even with Jerry Miculek at your side.

[krpduner]

One guy in Canada stopped a shooter. Works for me.

[Steve1968LS2]

Well, without a gun the victims had a zero percent chance..

SOOOOOOO... any improvement in those odds is well.. an improvement...

And I don't really trust CBS to be objective about guns..

[Bobby Ricigliano]

An armed counterattack or an escape are the only ways to stop such an event. Even if armed resistance doesn't put down the bad guys, it often confuses them and causes them to panic and retreat. How many liquor store surveillance videos have we seen where an armed employee causes immediate retreat and flight by the attackers?


After all, that is why cowards pick soft targets like a movie theater or place of business: They are betting they will be the only one in the place with guns and no one will shoot back at them.

[L84CABO]

Your odds are never going to be good when you are on the receiving end of a surprise attack with two trained shooters using AK's or similar. But would you rather go out on your knees or go out fighting with an opportunity to take one of them with you?

And btw...they should have run that scenario, each time increasing the number of civilians who are armed. Sure, 2 with a rifle against one with a pistol and you will probably still be a victim. But what happens when it's 2 against 2? 2 against 4? 2 against 12 armed citizens? I'm betting that the number of dead victims decreases substantially and the number of dead terrorists increase substantially.

And I'm also betting that if the terrorists know that there's a really good chance that they will be going up against 10 or 12 armed individuals, the attack will never happen. However, the terrorists knew that Charlie Hebdo was a gun free zone.

[Marquand]

I don't care what the results are. Simulations are just that - simulations. If someone is going to kick down my door at work or home and gun me down, I would at least like the opportunity to respond in kind. At best, I live and give other potential victims the same chance. At worst, I go down fighting and demonstrate to anyone considering the same act that they had better factor determined and armed resistance into their plans.

[SuperSet]

That's right, man. One's an unrelenting slaughter and the other's a fight.