Self defense shooting in Manassas

imported post

Thndr wrote:

While it has yet to be proven if this happened or not, I have my doubts.

Am I the only one that thinks engaging multiple target in close proximity with what I would call extremely controlled shot placement(headshots) under stress(fear for life) seems unlikely?

SNIP...

Click to expand...

I do not believe the incident asked about in the OP ever occurred. If it had it would have been big news here for days.


As to the possibility of someone shooting like this, there are actually scenarios in IPSC competitions that cover this. The most relevant is "El Presidente", where three unobstructed "shoot" targets are engaged in the open from approximately 5 yards. This is taken from an actual defensive shooting where a body guard took out three assailants who were attacking his charge. He put 2COM in each of three targets in less that 2 seconds. Try it, it is not as easy as it sounds.

So you ask if a person could put one in each of two targets? I say yes. You add an accuracy component to your questions that may not actually be in the mix. The head shots could have been accidental, VERY close range, even contact shots. Since this likely never happened, we will never know.

Regards

imported post

Think we are talking about smoke on a windy day - it doesn't exist.

No media reports, no police blotter, just an unconfirmed "he said" and this after 5 days from the alleged incident.

Yata hey

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Think we are talking about smoke on a windy day - it doesn't exist.

No media reports, no police blotter, just an unconfirmed "he said" and this after 5 days from the alleged incident.

Yata hey

Click to expand...

It is no t in any internal reports either.

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Think we are talking about smoke on a windy day - it doesn't exist.

No media reports, no police blotter, just an unconfirmed "he said" and this after 5 days from the alleged incident.

                 Yata hey

Click to expand...

I talked to someone who was there that night, I believe it happened. Same source as in the OP, he's credible IMHO.

imported post

longwatch wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Think we are talking about smoke on a windy day - it doesn't exist.

No media reports, no police blotter, just an unconfirmed "he said" and this after 5 days from the alleged incident.

                 Yata hey

Click to expand...

I talked to someone who was there that night, I believe it happened.

Click to expand...

Now you have my interest. I'll ask around as well.

imported post

Well, if no reports turn up soon, I will be filing a FOIA.

imported post

TFred wrote:

Perhaps I spoke too euphamistically...  the point made by the instructor was clearly that if you "shoot to wound", you will be in a heap of trouble!  Apologies, I see that was a poor choice of wording on my part.

I think the instructor was trying to be kind but clear to the guy who asked about it, who in my estimation, was one of those few folks you do occasionally encounter who should not be carrying a firearm...

We had a simulated real-life encounter training scenario at the end of the class, sort of a Wii on steroids... this guy was dead each time.  Never raised his weapon at any point in the scenario.  He did get pretty good at turning around and asking "am I dead?"

:banghead:

TFred

Click to expand...

Hopefully not getting this off topic, but was this on a F.A.T.S. type machine?

imported post

suntzu wrote:

Two shots fired and two hits to the head, two b/g deceased....

If this story is true and the insdividual who killed them does not end being indicted on a manslaughter charge--I'll be surprised....he was intentionally trying to kill them when he opened fire--the rounds to the head is the giveaway, at least to me--maybe it was reflex-it certainly sounded like he was aiming to kill them as opposed to just stopping the attack.

I don't see this boding well for the person who defended himself if this story is true.

Click to expand...

Understand that therearedifferences in which datum is being applied, who is applying it, and why.

As far as I know, legally speaking, once lethal force is authorized, its authorized. You can stop the attack with a shot to the chest or a shot to the head. Stopping the attack is the key element.Whether the attacker dies, legally speaking, is irrelevant, since lethal force was authorized (if it really was).

Shooting to stop, as opposed to shooting to kill, has several angles.

One is the PC angle. Don't confusea PC application of the datum with a legal application. You'll end up with skewed answers.

Another is the legal angle. As far as I know, from the legal angle, the key point is that you didn't keep shooting after the attack stopped, say the guy dropped his gun and started running. Or he was down, his gun was out ofhis reach, he wasn't moving, and you then walked up and shot him twice in the back of the head. Another legal angle, as I understand it,is that the prosecutor can try to take it off on a tangent, "He shot to kill! He wanted justice! He wanted to get even!" He's saying that even if the shooting was justified at the outset,once the attack stopped, and you kept shooting,those late shots are legally actionable because the authority touse lethal force expired when the attack stopped.

For head shots, if it ended up in court, you would just defend against it. Two attackers, close, means you must shut down the attacks RIGHT NOW. Little is more certain than a head shot with a large caliber pistol to do that. Except maybea pelvic shot with a load that would break the pelvis, and then only if the bad guy has a contact weapon, meaning knife or bludgeon. You just have to convince the jury of the tacticalrealities--gunshots tocenter-of-mass may not shut down the attack in time.Really all you are doing is convincing the jury thatit was necessary to shut down the attackimmediately, which is just another way ofsayingyou are convincing the jury that right-now, immediately effectiveforce that coincidentally is lethal was in fact necessary.

Most of the advice you hear against shoot-to-kill is primarily for 1) PC, so we don't look like bloodthirsty vigilantes to those who can't or don't want to distinguish, and 2) so such comments can't be used against one later ifhe ever is in a shooting.

imported post

nitrovic wrote:

TFred wrote:

Perhaps I spoke too euphamistically... the point made by the instructor was clearly that if you "shoot to wound", you will be in a heap of trouble! Apologies, I see that was a poor choice of wording on my part.

I think the instructor was trying to be kind but clear to the guy who asked about it, who in my estimation, was one of those few folks you do occasionally encounter who should not be carrying a firearm...

We had a simulated real-life encounter training scenario at the end of the class, sort of a Wii on steroids... this guy was dead each time. Never raised his weapon at any point in the scenario. He did get pretty good at turning around and asking "am I dead?"

:banghead:

TFred

Click to expand...

Hopefully not getting this off topic, but was this on a F.A.T.S. type machine?

Click to expand...

I don't think it was quite that fancy!

TFred

imported post

I don't know why it hasn't 'surfaced' yet. gotm4 states a Manassas Park officer relayed the incident to him also. Again, I am inclined to believe it happened as I have no reason to believe the 'source' is making it up.

In the course of my regular duty I talk to many Fire/EMT/LEO and it seems A LOT of things do not make it to the press that you think would. However, I am still searching for the truth, it is out there.

imported post

VAopencarry wrote:

...SNIP

Click to expand...

I am still searching for the truth, it is out there.

Click to expand...

I hate to burst your bubble, but there is NO "X" file. If this happened none of the local PDs are admitting it. I have talked to Manassas Park, Manassas, Prince William, the County Sheriff. I even talked to a volunteer from Buckhall fire house. Buckhall covers an area immediately adjacent to Manassas Park and Manassas and nothing.

Regards

imported post

Another unofficial source which can sometimes corroborate incident reports such as this is here:

Virginia Incidents and Breaking News

But no mention of anything like this at all.

TFred

imported post

longwatch wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Think we are talking about smoke on a windy day - it doesn't exist.

No media reports, no police blotter, just an unconfirmed "he said" and this after 5 days from the alleged incident.

Yata hey

Click to expand...

I talked to someone who was there that night, I believe it happened. Same source as in the OP, he's credible IMHO.

Click to expand...

No intended negative reference to the OP, he passed on what he had heard from a reliable source. Nevertheless, a total lack of confirmation/reporting by the media on what could easily be sensationalized creates the doubts. There could be reasons that the story is being suppressed for now I suppose.

Looking forward to more info.

Yata hey

imported post

I can't think of any other possible answers to the puzzle than 1) it didn't happen or 2) the media is participating in a supression of reporting.

Given the well documented history of the media's blatant attempt to not report, but to actually influence the most important events that take place in our country, I'm hard pressed to imagine anything so important that the media could be convinced to suppress.

Call me skeptical.

TFred

PS: ETA: I'm skeptical of the media's participation, not the OP's story... it's really a mystery!

imported post

I can dream a good X-Files style conspiracy theory that would fit everything neatly into place...Hitchcock himself would be proud. I don't think it'll help much, though.

imported post

I think this story is BS.

imported post

suntzu wrote:

he was intentionally trying to kill them when he opened fire--the rounds to the head is the giveaway

Click to expand...

Woah, wait a minute... Forget about the veracity of the story... Back this train up.

Exactly what is wrong with using deadly force to stop a deadly threat? Isn't that the whole damn point? Do you carry a gun for not self-defense?

Exactly when is it that you point a gun at someone, pull the trigger, and AREN'T trying to kill them? If you have no cause to justifiably kill, then why is the gun in your hand?

Why would you have the gun in your hand if you weren't in the course of killing to defend yourself? How many more ways can I explain this point... Of f-ing course he was intentionally trying to kill them, DUH!! I would too!

WTF is this argument supposed to be? :banghead:

imported post

That's the x-files part of it

imported post

ixtow wrote:

suntzu wrote:

he was intentionally trying to kill them when he opened fire--the rounds to the head is the giveaway

Click to expand...

Woah, wait a minute... Forget about the veracity of the story... Back this train up. snip........

Click to expand...

Since there is little merit in dissecting a non-event, it is perhaps the only reason for continuing this thread - at least in my opinion. If not truth, then what?

Diverting this"train" to debate why we carry is not the issue. BTW - I carry my defensive tools to be able to stop a life threatening event. It is my sincere desire to never take away that which does not belong to me.

Yata hey

imported post

I think the story is BS too.
I can't find anyone to confirm the rumor either.