"Only dull people are brilliant at breakfast" -Oscar Wilde |
"The liberal soul shall be made fat, and he that watereth, shall be watered also himself." -- Proverbs 11:25 |
"I came out of that store, I clicked the safety off, and I was ready," he explained on Fox and Friends. "I had my hand on my gun. I had it in my jacket pocket here. And I came around the corner like this." Zamudio demonstrated how his shooting hand was wrapped around the weapon, poised to draw and fire. As he rounded the corner, he saw a man holding a gun. "And that's who I at first thought was the shooter," Zamudio recalled. "I told him to 'Drop it, drop it!'"
But the man with the gun wasn't the shooter. He had wrested the gun away from the shooter. "Had you shot that guy, it would have been a big, fat mess," the interviewer pointed out.
Zamudio agreed:
"I was very lucky. Honestly, it was a matter of seconds. Two, maybe three seconds between when I came through the doorway and when I was laying on top of [the real shooter], holding him down. So, I mean, in that short amount of time I made a lot of really big decisions really fast. … I was really lucky."
When Zamudio was asked what kind of weapons training he'd had, he answered: "My father raised me around guns … so I'm really comfortable with them. But I've never been in the military or had any professional training. I just reacted."
The Arizona Daily Star, based on its interview with Zamudio, adds two details to the story. First, upon seeing the man with the gun, Zamudio "grabbed his arm and shoved him into a wall" before realizing he wasn't the shooter. And second, one reason why Zamudio didn't pull out his own weapon was that "he didn't want to be confused as a second gunman."
This is a much more dangerous picture than has generally been reported. Zamudio had released his safety and was poised to fire when he saw what he thought was the killer still holding his weapon. Zamudio had a split second to decide whether to shoot. He was sufficiently convinced of the killer's identity to shove the man into a wall. But Zamudio didn't use his gun. That's how close he came to killing an innocent man. He was, as he acknowledges, "very lucky."
That's what happens when you run with a firearm to a scene of bloody havoc. In the chaos and pressure of the moment, you can shoot the wrong person. Or, by drawing your weapon, you can become the wrong person—a hero mistaken for a second gunman by another would-be hero with a gun. Bang, you're dead. Or worse, bang bang bang bang bang: a firefight among several armed, confused, and innocent people in a crowd. It happens even among trained soldiers. Among civilians, the risk is that much greater.
The veteran patrolmen who opened fire on the suit-wearing gunman, Jeffrey Johnson, had only an instant to react when he whirled and pointed a .45-caliber pistol as they approached him from behind on a busy sidewalk.
Officer Craig Matthews shot seven times. Officer Robert Sinishtaj fired nine times, police said. Neither had ever fired their weapons before on a patrol.
The volley of gunfire felled Johnson in just a few seconds and left nine other people bleeding on the sidewalk.
In the initial chaos Friday, it wasn't clear whether Johnson or the officers were responsible for the trail of wounded, but based on ballistic and other evidence, "it appears that all nine of the victims were struck either by fragments or by bullets fired by police," Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told reporters on Saturday at a community event in Harlem.
Labels: America Gone Mad, gun control, gun nuts
But I can't help but wonder how often the NYPD performs pistol requalification on the range -- and under what circumstances they do so. I know some Federal agencies require monthly pistol requal. I don't think the NYPD does so that often. And I doubt that any police operation requires the qualification to be under "real world" -- read: high stress -- situations where someone is likely to shoot back. If the only real stress is that not hitting the bullseye requires you to retrain, it's hardly the same thing.
I remember reading a travel advice site some years ago. The question was "What kind of gun should I carry in backcountry Alaska to protect against the bears?" There was much discussion about bigger being better. But the best answer in my opinion was essentially "any gun you can shoot straight with an angry bear charging at you. Start by running a mile, then jumping up and down for a minute. While still jumping, draw your gun and put 6 shots into a paper target 10 feet away. If you don't put all the shots into the bullseye, you're lunch."
I don't know of any state that requires a pistol permit holder to demonstrate real proficiency with their weapon.
They did a study many yrs ago & concluded that in war only 15% of the soliders did the actual killing. The rest, if they got off a shot & hit someone it was an accident. I would think that is about it for the population in general. Only about 15% have what it takes to stay calm under extreme pressure & knows what to do. With those kind of odds I certainly wouldn't want to be around a bunch of paniced idiots all firing guns. It wuold have killed everybody.
The NYDP did the right thing in this case. But we can also see what happens when a lot of bullets go flying, there are chips of all sorts of things which also go flying.
Guns kill people & it is best people don't have guns. It works in Japan, it works in England, it works in Canada, etc.