And yet there are CCW holders that, even if they were present at a mass killing, armed and possibly in a position to make a difference, admittedly wouldn't do anything to intervene....interesting.
Lot's of "IF"s.
Of course, in a gun free zone I wouldn't be carrying, so while fleeing ASAP I'd be calling 911.
In locations where I can carry "legally", 2A infringements aside, unless the perp is shooting at or near me, I'd be calling 911 while making a hasty retreat. IF he/she is shooting near or at me, and assuming they aren't wearing body armor, I'd aim for the center of mass. Wearing body armor means smaller targets: head, groin, knees, feet, or even the hands holding the weapon, but those are successively harder to hit, and with the excitement and adrenaline flowing, and assuming the range is 10 yrds or less, the odds are still in favor of the guy with the long gun. But, maybe a shot or two to get the perp "off his game" so I can duck behind substantial cover or down a stairs, etc... But who knows? I may get in a lucky shot and take him out. For my own defense my ranges will be within my home or near my car ... 5 or 10 yards. During my last session I put 148 out of 150 rounds into the kill zone at ranges between 5 and 21 yards, and the other two were potentially incapacitating.
http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2012/12/18/top-10-myths-about-mass-shootings/The Brady Center defines "Mass Shootings" as those involving 2 or more victims over a period of 24 hours, as apposed to the FBI, which defines mass shootings as those with 4 or more unrelated victims at the same location within approximately the same time period. The Brady definition is self-serving because it allows them to include incidents where a distraught or crazy perp kills four of his family members, or kills two and injures at least two more.
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=9781Here's the FBI definition:
http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder/serial-murder-1#twoGenerally, mass murder was described as a number of murders (four or more) occurring during the same incident, with no distinctive time period between the murders. These events typically involved a single location, where the killer murdered a number of victims in an ongoing incident (e.g. the 1984 San Ysidro McDonalds incident in San Diego, California; the 1991 Luby’s Restaurant massacre in Killeen, Texas; and the 2007 Virginia Tech murders in Blacksburg, Virginia).
It also describes the law which "defines" serial murders, but that law is specific to defining when the FBI can step in, not to define serial murders in general.
From 1966 to 1994, when the assault weapon ban became law, 28 years, there were 19 "mass shootings" listed by Brady. During the period of the assault weapons ban, 10 years, there were 26 "mass shootings". Since the assault weapons ban died 9 years ago there have been 27 "mass shootings".
Using the FBI definition there have been 36 mass shootings since 1966, an average of 3/4ths per year, or 3 every four years.
From 1994 the assault weapon ban had no effect on the number of "mass shootings", and one could claim that the "Gun Free Zones" created in 1995 by the Safe Schools Act, and adopted by many well meaning but thoughtless business owners actually increased "mass shootings" because it created safe hunting reserves for the insane.
As far as taking "Active Shooter/Terrorist Interdiction" courses ... using a simple average on the FBI count there have been an average of 3 mass shootings every four years. In a country the size of America I'd wager that your chances of being in range of a mass shooter on one of those three days are lower than that of winning the lottery, even if you only used the land areas encompassed by city and urban dwellers.
When I was flying for business purposes I decided to take instrument flight training, thinking it would increase my opportunities to fly myself during inclement weather. After taking the training I realized that it would be useful for less than 10% of my flying, and that by changing my take off time I could avoid bad weather altogether. IF I couldn't change the time then I'd drive the chicken hawk instead of flying the SkyHawk. It takes a lot of flight practice to keep your instrument skills sharp. Even then, the idea that you are "prepared" to fly in bad weather doesn't guarantee that any given trip into a glory hole won't get you killed regardless of how good your skills are. Hail, ice, downdrafts and tornadic winds can overcome your skill set. I also noticed, in my IFR trainer, the tendency to want to take on unnecessary challenges, as if the training made him invulnerable. On my last training session with him he nearly got us both killed.
Likewise, "interdiction" courses may be good for law enforcement and security people who train with their weapon MUCH more often that I do, constantly rehearse such tactics, and can cover a 3 second 5 shot group at 20 yards with the palm of their hand, but I will never train that much to get that quick and accurate. So, I won't be fooling myself into thinking that I can take on a psychotic shooter unless my back is against the wall and its fight or die.
Finally, I chose to get a CHP and ccw. Others have that right too. If they don't want to protect themselves, or they think relying on police who always arrive AFTER the mayhem is the safest thing to do, I won't argue with them nor assume any responsibility to protect them.
