Left out of this analysis is the psychological effect on the gunmen of suddenly realizing that they might be facing armed opposition. According to various accounts I have read, the realization by a gunman that he is being confronted often wrecks his discipline and instills panic. Many's the case where upon being confronted, the gunman turns from attacking to fleeing.
To more accurately re-create the event they should have told the volunteer gunmen that everyone was completely unarmed so that when confronted with the reality that they are getting shot at, they would have a more normal reaction to the surprise this constitutes.
It would have thrown off their aim at the very least.
‘Left out of this analysis is the psychological effect on the gunmen of suddenly realizing that they might be facing armed opposition. According to various accounts I have read, the realization by a gunman that he is being confronted often wrecks his discipline and instills panic. Many’s the case where upon being confronted, the gunman turns from attacking to fleeing.’
This is the best point yet. No reenactment could simulate the shock of people who expect to be shooting fish in a barrel, when the fish unexpectedly start firing back. I have read countless incidents in which the would-be shooters—or robbers, whatever—go into complete panic at encountering unanticipated armed resistance.
So now I agree with whoever it was that made the very first comment, that this was a pointless exercise. Not even telling the pseudo terrorists to expect unarmed targets would do the trick. They know only paintballs are coming at worst. The real gunmen would be facing sudden, unexpected death—and that changes things.