David White
New member
You know what they say about a plan when the SHTF?
Anything and everything can change.
Anything and everything can change.
We've seen planning from Cho, the Aurora shooter and Columbine shooters that showed some sophistication.
The UT tower shooter was extremely well trained. It took civilians pinning him down with hunting rifles to break up his attack.I suppose "sophistication" means different things to different people. I don't see anything sophisticated about the techniques used at Columbine or Aurora. What I do see is an unsophisticated focus on equipment (either type or sheer numbers) and little attention to anything else. Their choices seem to be based upon TV and movie references, and little else.
I have yet to hear of a single such attacker who was especially skilled or who even attended a single training class or shooting match. If there were training videos found in someone's apartment, it would be common knowledge by now. The concern seems unwarranted as such.
It doesn't take much of an advantage to dominate those unarmed and untrained.
Talking with Mas Ayoob about this, he says this is one reason why he wants students to have a carry permit, LEO credentials, or military ID. He wants to be sure he is training "certified good guys."
I think some of the misunderstandings or conflicts about these events come from how you define the labels or terms.
Columbine shooters had a well worked out bomb plot that failed because they didn't have the techy know-how for the bombs. That was sophisticated compared to just shooting up the place -that wasn't their plan.
Some shooters have set up to hit the fleeing victims.
Cho and Aurora certainly showed planning.
What would be a guarantee?
At the least, each of the above passed a criminal background check.
Yep. I have a pretty specific idea what "rampager" calls to my mind ... something different than what Glenn has explained. That's why there can appear to be a disagreement, where there isn't one.