Gun jam could be as a result of the weapon being struck by a round. In addition, the death may also be as a result of someone taking the guy out.
What bothers me about this, is that there seems to be a mindset by law enforcement that nobody else is qualified to use lethal force but them.
Did someone witness him shoot himself, or is that just the operational explanation at this point?
This may be common knowledge, and so I may be off base.
What bothers me about this, is that there seems to be a mindset by law enforcement that nobody else is qualified to use lethal force but them.
I don’t believe this is true based on my experiences in law enforcement and I was one of the firearms instructors that set up the active shooter training for a 300+ officer department.
I think the major concern for law enforcement is having non-uniformed folks - either CCW civilians or detectives/off-duty LEO’s on scene with firearms drawn. I always worried I would shoot the wrong person (like the federal agent killed by the retired cop in NY wrestling with a robber) or get shot by another officer or armed civilian when I responded.
I am all for CCW and I have never had any misconceptions about my ability to protect everyone. I believe everyone has a God-given right to protect themselves.
However, I get tired of people blindly spouting off that one person with a CCW could stop anything without collateral damage. Critical incidents involving firearms are a tricky business for both law enforcement and military and making a 50ft shot with a handgun in a crowded mall is not as easy as the arm-chair Rambo’s claim.
If you think I am full of crap just ask Ayoob or one of the senior trainers at the Gunsite Academy. They will say the same thing.
If the story is true about the guy at the Clackamas mall shooting who did not take the shot I give him kudos. It is possible he influenced or impacted the thinking of the shooter by simply assuming a good tactical position while recognizing his own limitations. Had the shooter continued this gentleman gave himself a tactical edge (and a stable platform) from which to engage and that demonstrates an excellent mental foundation for concealed carry.
I teach my civilian classes and LEO’s that pulling the firearm out is the easy part.... putting rounds on target with adrenaline pumping through your mind and body is the hard part. The difficulty is multiplied in a crowd with panicked people. I know guys who were expert shots on the range that could not shoot for crap when it counted. I saw officers that were not all that great on the range that were cold as ice and did not miss when it counted. You never know.... it’s tricky business and I agree with the best trainers out there - mental conditioning is the most important thing.
The video of Columbine showed how chaotic the situation can be and you would have needed to be very close to the shooters to engage because there were students running all over the place. Most of their shots were at close range against targets that froze or tried to hide in plain view. You would have needed to advance on the shooters and likely draw their attention - you would worry about shooting a kid trying to run away in your field of fire - they did not give a damn. They had the advantage.
Just food for thought. Active shooting against an armed opponent requires many working parts under extreme duress. It is easy for someone to write one sentence differing with what I just wrote, but I bet they have either not experienced it or given it half the thought they should.
I would urge anyone to be prepared to protect themselves, but never think simply having a firearm or access to a firearm will do the trick. Conditioning and practicing is just as important as carrying.