Comming from Britain , most folks think that my opinion on gun ownership is somewhat silly, but this situation may lend my opinion some weight.
A) the shooter was disarmed, and detained by a member of the public who had no weapon on his person B) another person who DID have a gun, was moments
from pulling the trigger on the man who saved the day.
Let me examine in more detail point A) . In this incident, a person who had no equipment whatsoever, save his own body, took the weapon away from the
offender, and subdued the offender by covering him with the piece he had just taken from the offender. This suggests to me, that defending ones self ,
and others can be achieved perfectly well without the need for weapons of any sort. If an unarmed bystander, can disarm and subdue an armed assailant
, then surely the carriage of weapons is not NESSACARY. Its certainly within the feild of the relevant amendment to the constitution of the U.S. and
thats a really respectable document of course. But what I am saying , is that as a deterant , and as a defensive weapon, guns are not required as much
as they are desired.
Guns are for killing at a distance. You have to be some sort of pathetic mewling coward to shoot a person at close range rather than doing the job
with your hands, and an even bigger wuss to insist on murdering someone from a distance in the first place. Furthermore, in terms of immediate self
defense, if someone comes up to me on a street and pulls a gun out and sticks it in my face, they have me at a disadvantage if I concentrate on
pulling a gun of my own. I would have to clear the weapon from its holster , ensure the saftey was off, perhaps cock the weapon dependant on what sort
Im carrying. Hell maybe even load the sucker if its being carried unloaded. But , if I have been trained to react correctly, I could disarm the
assailant and turn his weapon against him, before he has had a chance to twitch his trigger finger, using just my body. Its faster to use your body as
a weapon of defense in those circumstances, because you dont have to draw your hands, and you dont have to load them, or take the saftey off. One
moment you are victim, the next you are victor. Less than a second is all it takes.
The other advantage to unarmed defense is that when your body is the weapon, you have so much more control over the potential risk you pose to others
in a defense situation. Let me give you a scenario to illustrate that.
A person is walking down a busy street, surrounded by hundreds of people on all sides. Suddenly shots are fired toward that person from an unknown
location, and that person takes cover down a side alley, readying thier side arm for use. They have a peek around the corner to see if they can spot
the origin for the shot. They locate the shot origin point, and begin to return fire. Already , by the actions of the initial shooter, and the return
fire of the besieged party, several hundred people on the street have been put at risk, and dependant on the angles involved, so have people near
windows in buildings in close proximity. This is because ricochets and just plain old misses, can result in death for a bystander very easily in such
situations. Now, lets rewind to the moment when the defender dived down an alley to avoid being ventilated. Assume that our plucky hero has no weapon
save his or her hands. The lack of return fire will bring a sufficiently boisterous criminal out of his firing position to investigate the alley
entrance. This will give a defender time, time to either choose to fight , or choose to fly, either of which is viable at this point. If flight is an
option, then all well and good, a police report is filed, evidence collected at the scene, hopefully leading to an arrest. If not, then he or she has
time to prepare to defend themselves. Upon entering the alley, the defender will look around for places to conceal themselves and lay in ambush, or
loose detritus that might serve as an unexpected weapon, which would give them the edge , as surprise is key in martial matters. Even were no weapon
to be found, a simple place to conceal the defender is all thats needed. Trash can, under some bags or empty boxes, round the edge of a door frame or
in the shadowy recesses of a rear basement access would be good. The last two options are preferable , because leaving the ambush point must be quiet
as possible, to delay detection till the last second, so that the defender can be on the assailant , grasping the gun arm,removing the weapon from the
offender, and detaining them until official persons can take them away. Drawing the offending subject into close quaters removes the advantage of them
having a gun, because the environment favours fluidity of movement, and last minuite action, rather than the linear progression of a bullet in flight.
It also reduces the risk to others, because it narrows the field of fire which persons on the street are exposed to. Forcing the offender to enter an
alley allows the defender to control the flow of events with more dexterity than they could if they were merely involved in a shooting match across a
crowded street. Having an effective range limited to the end of thier arms and legs also reduces the risk that a defending party will be responsible
for the death of a bystander, since accidentaly punching, throwing, kicking, headbutting, or kneeing a person to death is hard to do , much harder
than say, letting off a round in a hot situation, and finding out later that its blown the skull out of a perfectly healthy ten year old down the
edit on 20-1-2011 by TrueBrit because: Removal of excess characters.