Super Scientific Study Proves CCW Meaningless

Status
Not open for further replies.
In every senario in that film, the guy who burst into the room knew which student had the gun, and went after that student.

How many times in a shooting situation like that does the shooter know which would be victom is carrying.

If you have 25 people in the room, what's the changes of the would be shooter targeting the one guy with the gun? What if there are more then one person carrying?

What if all the 25 were carrying.

Sorry, that video doesn't change any thing about my training or carrying.

Read this study, kind of blows holes in the video.

http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/kleck1.html
 
Well that does it. I'm going to stop training with my weapons and put my EDC .45 away for good. The video has proven to me that everything I was doing was pointless...:(

Seriously though that "study" was a crock of bull feces.

It was stacked in favor of a failure. I'm sure it'd be just as easy to put on a "study" that stacked the odds in favor of successful results in a CCW situation.

Crap like that is just how they choose to put it together.
 
The video "proves" the same thing we preach on here all the time : Training and Practice are crucial tools. But, the exercise was a bit rigged, the BG's knew there was an armed student, and, who he was. I don't think the hoods disguise the students to the point that a trained officer could not pick out the armed target and neutralize him before he could deploy the weapon.

The other thing the video "proved" is that a TV production can be biased to show whatever results you wish to portray, go figure :eek:
 
Last edited:
Did anyone notice that the ones they picked looked like they were not old enough to buy a gun ? And I am sure they edited out the ones that placed one shot between the guys eyes.
 
Cato Institute study of media-reported gun incidents (DGUs and crimes), contradicts the results of this experiment.

Poor Joey, WHY OH WHY DIDN'T HE TUCK HIS SHIRT IN !!!

OH THE HUMANITY !!!

Oy vey - poor Lee Paige, he's was on TV again. :( no wonder he sued !
 
The video "proves" the same thing we preach on here all the time : Training and Practice are crucial tools. But, the exercise was a bit rigged, the BG's knew there was an armed student, and, who he was. I don't think the hoods disguise the students to the point that a trained officer could not pick out the armed target and neutralize him before he could deploy the weapon.
Click to expand...

Looks like the video just proves that if a highly trained shooter runs onto a tesing set to specifically assassinate a person, odds are they will be able to do so.

If it were a real test:
1) the shooter wouldn't know who is armed and where they are, or more precisely, the shooter WOULDN'T KNOW THERE'S ANOTHER SHOOTER IN THE ROOM AT ALL.

2) A further tewst would be done, with no defenseive shooter. How many survive in the first vs. the second. Whats not discussed is that the defensive shooter focuses all the action on them allowing others to get out.
Show the scenario where the BG just stands in the entrance and starts blasting away.
 
Let's discuss how it affected you.
Click to expand...

Ok, well Nathan, when I watched this video I felt angry, especially when Diane Sawyer said "remember that a cell phone is a valuable weapon for saving the lives of those around you."


:mad: <--- this is my angry face



.
 
Didn't she also say something like "We have found no incidents where having a gun did any good?"
Ignoring, of course, all the statistics gathered by government agencies to the contrary.
Wonder how some of those propagandizing folks can sleep at night.
 
While the people in the video were definitely set up to fail, the video has a lot to offer if you disregard the obvious anti intentions.

Would be interesting to see the same test with no ccw in the class, and another with multiple ccw's.
 
Have a cellphone to dial 911 or keep an effective tool to defend my life...hmm. Why can't I have both? Or is that too unfair for the poor, poor BG?
 
Wow! Talk about your unlucky days. You are a new CCW holder in a small room filled with actors working against your success. You have minimal to no previous gun experience, you don't have a real gun. Then to top it off, you are attacked by a highly trained(1000's of hours of training and instruction. . .probably former military with combat experience) bad guy who knows you are the person with a gun. Yea, this is realistic!<-sarcasim.
Frankly, I think even the instructor dies if roles revers
Click to expand...

My video comment.

Good job ABC news. You proved that a well trained assassin can assassinate a slightly trained loan CCW holder. Thank goodness I don't go around angering assassins.

BTW, the lady killed the assassin. Was she first? How would that wound have affected his will to fight? If I remember right, due to the helmet size, I think she would have been missed or grazed on her real head. She was also hit elsewhere, but again. . when.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The video "proves" the same thing we preach on here all the time : Training and Practice are crucial tools. But, the exercise was a bit rigged, the BG's knew there was an armed student, and, who he was. I don't think the hoods disguise the students to the point that a trained officer could not pick out the armed target and neutralize him before he could deploy the weapon.
Click to expand...

The gunman didn't need to pick out the armed student at all. The setup was that the armed student got delayed while receiving the gun, and then they enter the class after everybody else is already seated. The armed student never had a choice in seating positions so the gunman always knew exactly where the armed student was.
 
This video has been around for ages and discussed numerous times. See post 2 for a link to a decent debunking article.

There's no reason to trample this path again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top