Angry Mob Attacks Family... (This DOES happen!)

[A_McDougal]

Anyone who feels sure a group of teens will continue attacking into gun fire, should try shooting their gun without hearing protection.

If I were the investigating police, I'd start at the University of Akron, and follow up at the Akron Masjid, both right close to the stadium. Besides gangs, where do groups of young male extremists congregate?

[Evan Thomas]

Sounds like you've already resolved yourself to die. Me? Not so much.

Whoa, whoa now. Easy there, big fella. No one's saying don't have a gun... no one's saying don't use it if you do have it. What some of us are saying is that this is a situation in which having or using a gun doesn't guarantee a good outcome, and may make things worse. Using the gun may still seem like the best option, but we have no way to predict what will happen. It's not magic.

And the OP is suggesting that having more ammunition would be likely to improve the outcome. Some of us are questioning that assumption, which is not the same as not wanting to be (reasonably) prepared.

[Brian Pfleuger]

When I go out on patrol in Israel, I dont carry one magazine in my M4 and leave all of my other gear on base since the odds are I won't need to use more than 29 rounds, or stun grenades, or my helmet or any other peice of gear.
Rather, I load up to full combat load, each time, every time because this builds discipline, instills confidence and keeps my combat mindset in check. To do anything else is simply stupid.

What correlation does that have to the streets of America? We're not in a war zone, we don't have suicide bombers, we don't have people targeting our markets with car bombs, we don't live in a tense standoff with our neighbors.


There's two things here. First, what effect we can expect our drawing, or even firing, a gun to have on the aggressor(s) and secondarily, one of what level of threat we are willing to prepare for.

My point is, and has been all since my first post in this thread, that we should have ZERO expectations of what will happen when we draw a gun. The BG(s) may run, they may grovel, they may attack physically, they may draw their own gun..... we can't not know and we should not pretend that we might now. We do not know if having a gun will be good or bad in any given situation. Part of being a reasonable and responsible gun owner, and carrier, is having put some thought into what we're going to do if having the gun turns out not to be helpful, or worse, causes the situation to go from bad to SHTF. Having a gun DOES NOT give you an advantage. Having a BRAIN gives you an advantage. An advantage that a tool like a gun can enhance or diminish, depending on your actions.

[matolman1]

Correct. I am not advocating carrying hundreds of rounds of ammunition with you every time you leave the house to go out in public.

I believe that it is reasonable to train people to carry at least 1 spare magazine whenever they are carrying their semi-auto with them.

If you carry a revolver, you should carry at least one speed loader with you.

This builds confidence and combat mindset. "I know I can engage multiple targets." "I know I can provide cover fire during an active shooter situation." etc...

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Old argument - Ben's right!

No need to replay it. If you don't want to, don't.

BTW, I have been:

1. Hit by lightning
2. Avoided more than 5 opponent - no - I scuttled away and wasn't a gun guy then but these were murderous folk and a reload or higher cap would have been nice if it didn't go that way.

But here's the bottom line - if you don't want to plan for the extreme event - just don't. That's it. Insisting others are somehow incorrect for doing it is just getting plan old silly.

[matolman1]

Glenn says it right.

I guess I am just more combat mindset oriented than others due to where I have fought terrorists for 12 years and where I currently live (Memphis, the highest violent crime rate in the Country).

Thats the way I train others to be. "Always expect the unexpected" is a matter of life for me and those I train. Anything less and I am not earning my paycheck.

[Master Blaster]

The mob didnt seek out the nearest Karate DoJo, they didnt look for a college football team, or a couple bar bouncers to attack, they didnt storm the police station, or the national guard armory. They didnt go to a redneck bar to challenge 50 drunk Crackers. They didnt seek out the Crips, Bloods, Latin Kings, Pagans, or the Hells Angels MC club to pick a fight with.
They looked for the most helpless victims they could find who they vastly outnumbered, and didn't know. Its what a bunch of high, scared, cowards do to make themselves look brave.

They were a mob of COWARDS.

Had the victim pulled a gun and fired one shot they would have been gone instantly.

BTW if I were the Police I would check the cellphone twitter traffic in the area that night similar stuff has happened in Philadelphia Pa, and it was traced to Twitter inspired "Wilding"

[Mike Irwin]

"Mr. Irwin, I find your comment to be ironic since your signature line above seems to say the opposite of your sarcastic comment regarding carrying 31 rounds rather than "300.""


Mato...

It's not irony, it's humor.

Any logical, rational person realizes that going from 30 rounds to 300 is truly jumping from the sublime to the ridiculous.

Not to mention that to carry 300 rounds of ammo would require 20 or more magazines.


As for what I TRULY believe?

I believe I'll take my chances with the decisions I make, and not depend on others to dictate scenarios to me as a "decision making aid."

I believe I'll also take responsibility for the decisions I make, and not try to blame someone else if my decisions get me into hot water.

Finally, I also believe that this story is false, and that it wasn't Akron inner city youths who attacked this family, but that it was an extended tribe of Hottentots and that this family has only itself to blame for not calling the 5"/cal. 38 guns into service.



If you're lucky, maybe someone will explain that last cryptic remark.

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Originally Posted by Mike Irwin

but that it was an extended tribe of Hottentots

Not the fuzzy wuzzies? You know they broke the square!

[matolman1]

Mr. Irwin, It most CERTAINLY could not have been the Hotentots as the Hotentots were busy shopping in Narnia that evening.

I believe I'll take my chances with the decisions I make, and not depend on others to dictate scenarios to me as a "decision making aid."

A person can really learn from others experiences and scenarios and I think it is prudent to tailor my decision making based on new information or scenarios that have happened to others. History repeats itself.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Insisting others are somehow incorrect for doing it is just getting plan old silly.

Except, I have not insisted that it is "incorrect" to prepare for an extreme event. I said that it is unnecessary, yes. Incorrect, no. I have, in fact, said the opposite, that whomever feels that they need to prepare for such an event should just go ahead and do it. Those who feel I am wrong have rarely afforded me the same consideration.

As for a "combat mindset". Well, I have no need for such a thing. I can be vigilant and prepared without being ready for "combat".

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

But here's the bottom line - if you don't want to plan for the extreme event - just don't. That's it. Insisting others are somehow incorrect for doing it is just getting plan old silly.

I don't think anyone's saying "Don't plan for it." And yes, that would be silly. I think there are a couple of genuine questions that get lost in all the "is too/is not" posturing, once that gets going. First, a very concrete one: would a gun and a couple of magazines have helped in the situation reported in the OP's article? The answer to which, I think, is a big "Who knows?" At the same time, it's not clear that two magazines would have been better than one -- especially when the point of comparison is not having any.

The second question is how "extreme" an event do you plan for, where planning equals how much ammunition do you carry, or perhaps, in general, how heavily you're armed on a daily basis? The answer, so far, seems to be somewhere between 16 and 300 rounds... and 31 rounds hardly seems excessive, as compared to 300.

But the more important point is that if your "plan" revolves around hardware, and if you think that, in some magic way, having the right hardware is going to guarantee a good outcome, you're probably going to be disappointed. And I'm sure that you and Mr. Goldstein would both agree with that...

Originally Posted by peetzakilla

As for a "combat mindset". Well, I have no need for such a thing. I can be vigilant and prepared without being ready for "combat".

Well said. It's not the way I choose to meet the world, given that I'm fortunate enough not to live in a war zone.

[Tennessee Gentleman]

The classic conundrum of all contingency planning is whether to plan for the most likely or the most catastrophic event. Often you cannot do both. I vote for most likely.

[Doc Intrepid]

When you think about it, that would have been an event that caused high anxiety - particularly because of the proximity of one's wife and children.

I certainly don't envy the victim - Marshall.

One reason that I don't envy him is that it would certainly seem to me (in the calm of retrospection) that he was never in imminent danger of losing his life (or the lives of his family).

He was facing an angry crowd of teenagers, yes, but none of them apparently had or brandished or even displayed a firearm, a stick, a golf club, a ball bat, or any weapon at all, as far as I can tell.

I'm not a guy blessed with a great deal of ability to predict the future, but I supect that had Marshall pulled out a pistol and killed 4 or 5 of the unarmed teenagers a couple things would have happened. First, the rest likely would have run away. Second, Marshall would have more to fear from the survivors than he has now to fear from them (assuming they get away with the assault). And third, Marshall would find himself in a world of crap as he would be facing not just hospital bills but lawyer bills, court appearances, and possibly jail time and a felony record, after the 4 or 5 unarmed teenagers are buried and then promptly made into Saints in the media. Marshall would lose not only his job and his savings accounts, but possibly his home, his freedom, and any future potential to get a job where a felony record would not impact his employability.

Because, as far as I can see, at no time was Marshall legally justified in killing a half-dozen or so of the unarmed teenagers.

Like Glenn and Pete have said, if you want to carry dressed for war, more power to you.

If you don't want to, thats your choice too.

But I don't think that packing a pistol and two spare magazines necessarily prepares you to deal with an angry mob; and if they are unarmed and you open up on them - absent any clear and present threat to your existence of that of your loved ones - you will eventually understand why that was a bad idea.

IMHO. YMMV.

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Originally Posted by Doc Intrepid

He was facing an angry crowd of teenagers,

Which would I believe constitute disparity of force and therefore legally justify SD. Any of you lawyers like fiddletown could corrrect me. However, you other pointsto the aftermath are pretty straight. Might not be successfully sued civilly depending on state law. Retribution would definately be a concern.

[cracked91]

I think mob attacks would be much more likely in some kind of SHTF scenario, blackout, natural disaster, etc. As for me, being that I am still a teenage boy (19) I am willing to bet that after a single gunshot everyone one of those kids would have scattered.

Mobs are made of cowards. The reason they bring 50 people to do a simple thing is because not a single one of them is prepared to be possibly hurt or killed. So when they start hearing bullets flying, every single one of their brains has the same thing pop up on screen "OH **** " In all honesty I would say a few firecrackers would scatter most of a mob. And remember, the bigger a mob is, the more confusion there is going to be which transforms into fear very quickly.

[skifast]

The guy is lucky he wasn't seriously hurt or killed. Sure, there is no guarantee that pulling a gun and shooting the guys in front would make them run. There is also no guarantee that the guy would not have been killed and his wife and daughters raped and killed.

If it is me, I empty my mags shooting at their heads, while trying to get in the house and grabbing the AK and throwing my wife the Mossy.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Choosing most likely is a criterion for some. Most likely in the gun world will be solved with an unloaded gun as most DGUs are deterrent in nature with no shots fired.

As I have said many times (big yawn by now) - the issue is not the modal incident but a reasonable cut off in the extremes or consideration of whether the incident distribution is really multimodal.

One modal lump is the one mugger, no shots, deterrent usage. Thus, that's the one that folks say they can handle with a limited gun.

Another modal lump of lesser probabilities is the extreme, higher intensity incident - such as rampage shooting, large group attack.

It's rare but does happen. What is a reasonable set up for this kind of incident that is comparable with normal dress and gives you reasonable options? It is not an outfit that goes to war. I've hung out with people with such rigs in regular old restaurants, etc. and we don't look like a SWAT time. Just folks with a casual vest or floppy shirt.

I opine that a semi with one or two hicap mags works. Also, from experience and from the people I train with, it is not hard to do and can be comfortable.

About the mob scene - mobs have been fairly well studied. They stratify into:

1. Leaders in the attack
2. Close followers who are right after the leaders
3. Pack - that usually hangs back until they see the leaders being successful.

Taking out #1 and 2 with some hits in 3 would probably turn them around. 2 and 3 usually stop if 1 is removed.

Can you do it in real time? Time and distance, cover, etc. - you will have to be there.

You can plan for reasonable criterion cuts, so that the 300 round cliche is just rhetoric.

Also, as pointed out before - the extra mag is for the rare event of a malfunction (not so rare with some guns).

Many clearance drills are to rip out the mag and toss it and reload. Low probability but it's low p that you even need bullets.

As far as the argument just revolving around hardware - that's also silly - it's not a magic wand so if you don't train and just carry a gun and talk about tactics - that's posturing from my point of view. As a FOG - I don't train and practice because I think the gun by itself is Green Lantern's power ring.

But why train - there's a modal, most likely scenario that I just wave the gun around without firing a shot. Who gives a crap about sight picture, trigger re-set, grip, fast reloads, off hand drills, one hand drills for injured shooters, clearance, etc. It's most likely it will never happen - what a waste of time! Thus, buy a gun and practice waving it at the single mugger. That's all you need according the misapplied view of risk and statistics.

That's the arguments - carry what you want based on your view of probabilities. Such a bore.

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by Doc Intrepid

One reason that I don't envy him is that it would certainly seem to me (in the calm of retrospection) that he was never in imminent danger of losing his life (or the lives of his family).

Originally Posted by skifast

The guy is lucky he wasn't seriously hurt or killed.

I think the article said Mr. Marshall spent five days in a critical care unit with a head injury, which I'd say was evidence that he was in "imminent danger" of losing his life. (And is looking at thousands of dollars in medical bills.) He's lucky he's not dead, but that's a far cry from walking away.

Doc, you may be right about what would have happened if he'd shot before anyone hit him, but once he was on the ground, I'd say he or anyone else in his party would have been in "reasonable fear of his life."

And I think TG's point about disparity of force is a good one. A mob of 50??

Originally Posted by cracked91

Mobs are made of cowards.

Mmm... Not an assumption I'd put to the test, if I had a choice. They're probably made of some cowards, and some braver dudes, and some just plain idiots who care more about looking good in front of their buddies than about doing the smart thing...

I think this assumption is sort of a corollary of the one about the magic power of the gun...

[Brian Pfleuger]

Thus, buy a gun and practice waving it at the single mugger. That's all you need according the misapplied view of risk and statistics.

That's the general response to my argument, the standard sort of "make the argument seem silly". Looking down on it from my perch in academia, with a sneer and sniff, or, by those who simply choose to ignore all the facts of every kind, they call it silly, wrong, unprepared, signing my own death warrant, ready to die, but never refute it.

Except, that's not my argument. That's the big problem there. Not a single person has yet addressed my argument.

and then there's this:

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

Insisting others are somehow incorrect for doing it is just getting plan old silly.

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

Old argument - Ben's right!

So, it doesn't go both ways, I suppose, which has been the general flow of these discussions. I am wrong for saying that there is such a thing as over prepared, and the line is lower than some people think but those same people are not wrong for saying that I am under prepared, "prepared to die", etc....


Not that any of this has to do with my original point about the OP, which was that having a gun, of any capacity, would not have automatically made this a better situation. Believing that having a gun will make things better for you is a very dangerous assumption. Maybe more dangerous than believing that NOT having a gun will make things better.

That's my big beef here. If he had a gun it would have been better for him. That is an unbelievably enormous and dangerous assumption.

[NWPilgrim]

Thanks to the OP for the post. For those of us who want to defend ourselves in the face of daunting odds it is a good reminder that there are situations where the threat may be more than one or two attackers. We all have to judge the particular circumstance at the time and chose our own actions that seem appropriate.

For some, obviously, they prefer to fight only when the odds are in their favor and that is their choice. In that case I don't understand why you would carry at all (perhaps you don't) since you are likely to be surprised and at an initial disadvantage in most threat scenarios. Sometimes we may see things unfold, but the nature of legal defense means the other party has already initiated his plan of action against you before you can draw and fire.

For me, I choose to have the tools at hand to exercise a range of responses, and decide which option to execute. Thanks for the reminder and a real life scenario we can consider.

[fisherman66]

I want to prevent this from happening to me. What do you suggest?

Weather rocket kills man and blows up his body at cremation
A Chinese man originally thought to have been struck by lightning was in fact killed by a small weather rocket whose existence was only discovered when his body exploded during his cremation.


By Richard Spencer in Beijing
Published: 1:07PM GMT 16 Dec 2008

The body of Wang Diange, from the Chinese province of Inner Mongolia, was found in the wreckage of a house where he had been overseeing the wake of a previous family funeral, after mourners felt a loud explosion which took off half the roof.

As it was raining and thundery, they decided that the house, and Mr Wang in particular, had been struck by lightning. The police came to the same conclusion.

Further inquiries were made a few days later after Mr Wang's own funeral. As his body was being put into the cremation chamber, it blew up spectacularly, bursting the doors off the oven.

When the fire had been put out, the only clue as to what had happened was a small twisted piece of metal, which seemed to be the glowing remnants of a screw.

At first, local metallurgists were unable to determine what it was, though they noted it bore a military serial number. After a lengthy investigation, however, it was suggested it might be part of a shell casing.

Inquiries revealed that the rainfall on the day of the original disaster was triggered by the local weather bureau, which had been firing shells into the atmosphere to break up hail in order to protect the local tobacco crop.

Inside the shells were silver iodide, a chemical that helps to break up hail into rain.

Their own investigators concluded that one shell must have failed to explode, hit the house, and lodged in Mr Wang's body. There it passed unnoticed because of his extensive injuries, according to local newspaper reports.

As a result, and three years after Mr Wang died, his family have now received 80,000 yuan (£8,000) in compensation from the weather bureau.

Me Chinese, me play jest, me put weather rocket in yer chest.



wow

[Mike Irwin]

"I want to prevent this from happening to me. What do you suggest?"

Stay inside where the big, bad, rokkitz can't get at you.

[Mike Irwin]

"For some, obviously, they prefer to fight only when the odds are in their favor and that is their choice."

Sometimes the difference between life and death is knowing when to fight and when to run.

There are LOTS of dead people throughout the ages who chose unwisely.

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by fisherman66

I want to prevent this from happening to me. What do you suggest?

Originally Posted by Mike Irwin

Stay inside where the big, bad, rokkitz can't get at you.

Well, that didn't work for Mr. Wang, did it? He was inside.

The body of Wang Diange, from the Chinese province of Inner Mongolia, was found in the wreckage of a house where he had been overseeing the wake of a previous family funeral, after mourners felt a loud explosion which took off half the roof.

A bunker... Must... have... a bunker.

And I want to be buried in it, which will solve the not-blowing-up-when-I'm-cremated part of the problem.