My dad just witnessed a mass-shooting in Carson City

[kaltesherz]

http://www.rgj.com/article/20110906/...text|FRONTPAGE

My dad just called me to say he witnessed a mass-shooting at a restaurant he had just walked out of after having breakfast. According to him a guy in his 30's who appeared very calm pulled out an AK and opened fire on people in the parking lot and then walked into the building, firing on full auto. He said the guy ran just past him (after the first shots he hid behind cover and the gunman didn't see him), and that he was extremely close to the shooter. When I found the attached article and told him 7 had been shot I think it finally sank in... he said he saw him firing a lot but didn't see anyone go down, then again when something as chaotic as that is going down you're not really paying attention.

I asked him "and you wonder why I carry?" and his response was "I thought about that as it was going on, if you were there you could have stopped it immediately". Hopefully my father will learn from this, get a permit, and start carrying the 1911 that I gave him a few years ago.

He had just finished his witness statement with local LE before he called me. I'm just glad he's ok but am sorry for the not-so-lucky victims.

[NWPilgrim]

Wow, this is unusual. Glad your father made it out just in time and had the good reaction to get behind cover instead of gawking.

Pretty unusual the shooter used a full auto AK. Going to be interesting to see who this guy is and his motivation for doing this. Can't imagine the terror of those inside as a breakfast at IHOP was instantly turned into carnage.

One of the anti-gun criticism of CCW is that if you were inside you would not have enough time to react, so what good is your pistol. But as your father's situation illustrates, if there are several people carrying then some will be inside and some outside and one or more of them may well have an opportunity to shoot the attacker in the back before he continues killing.

[CarlosDJackal]

Glad your Dad is okay.

To those of us who carry this is a perfect example of why law-abiding citizens should be legally allowed to do so anywhere.

To the anti-gun crowd this will be just another bogus reason why they should ban all guns.

Therein lies the difference between Sheep and Sheepdog.

[kaltesherz]

My father was an Infantryman in the Chilean Army back in the day and taken fire before, so his training just kicked in (thank god).

I asked him several times and he said he was sure the shooter was on automatic. 2 shots on semi, then the rest full auto. Said the guy looked "very normal" was "extremely calm" and "showed absolutely no expression".

Wow, this is unusual. Glad your father made it out just in time and had the good reaction to get behind cover instead of gawking.

Pretty unusual the shooter used a full auto AK. Going to be interesting to see who this guy is and his motivation for doing this. Can't imagine the terror of those inside as a breakfast at IHOP was instantly turned into carnage.

One of the anti-gun criticism of CCW is that if you were inside you would not have enough time to react, so what good is your pistol. But as your father's situation illustrates, if there are several people carrying then some will be inside and some outside and one or more of them may well have an opportunity to shoot the attacker in the back before he continues killing.

[zacbol]

Wow. I'm glad to hear your dad is okay. If anything would motivate one to carry regularly, that would.

That said, if I'd been in your father's position AND had a weapon, given your description I'm not sure I would have involved myself. I would likely have done exactly what he did, weapon or not. It may sound callous but the mission statement (stolen) that informs my actions is "I want to come through this with a minimum of damage to me and mine". Everything is situational and it's possible I would have become involved anyway based on emotion or a sense of duty. I'd like to think, however that if I (and everyone I care about) had gotten out safely, I would have gotten a safe distance away, called the police and then let those paid to deal with this kind of stuff do so rather than take on the gunman myself. If the option was to engage in an "unnecessary" gunfight where the upside was saving people I don't know but with the possibility I left my son father-less, I know what I'd do every time. If that makes me uncaring, so be it.

[NWPilgrim]

Zacbol, I agree that most of us would e concerned to get to safety even if carrying. You never know how many more there are, and we are responsible for our own.

HOWEVER, the point of CCW is that if several people there and nearby were carrying then there are OPTIONS. People outside would at least have the option to come to the aid of others. Some outside might e friends or family coming in to meet loved ones and would surely come to their aid. And if some inside were carrying then one or two of them might have had the opportunity and reactions to put a stop to it.

Without CCW nobody has much of an option but to hide as best as possible and hope the shooter does not ferret you out.

A lone person carrying may or may not make any difference, but several people carrying makes it much more likely one of them inside the target area or outside it can and will take a shot. So much of the anti-CCW rhetoric focuses on just a single person CCW, when in fact the point is to have as many people carrying as possible to improve the odds against a surprise attack.

News item just starting to show as "Breaking News" but no article on foxnews.com

[Magic_Salad0892]

Wow. I'm glad to hear your dad is okay. If anything would motivate one to carry regularly, that would.

That said, if I'd been in your father's position AND had a weapon, given your description I'm not sure I would have involved myself. I would likely have done exactly what he did, weapon or not. It may sound callous but the mission statement (stolen) that informs my actions is "I want to come through this with a minimum of damage to me and mine". Everything is situational and it's possible I would have become involved anyway based on emotion or a sense of duty. I'd like to think, however that if I (and everyone I care about) had gotten out safely, I would have gotten a safe distance away, called the police and then let those paid to deal with this kind of stuff do so rather than take on the gunman myself. If the option was to engage in an "unnecessary" gunfight where the upside was saving people I don't know but with the possibility I left my son father-less, I know what I'd do every time. If that makes me uncaring, so be it.

I understand this logic. 100%.

However, I must be stupid, because I would have gone in after this guy.

Something about a random dude walking into a restaurant shooting innocent people doesn't sit well with me, and if I were there (armed) I would have done all that was necessary of me to stop it. Plus. Element of surprise.

I also don't have kids, and don't have to worry about that.

OP: Glad your Dad's alright.

[A-Bear680]

Glad to hear your Father is OK and prayers for the injuried. I'll be interested in how the wanna-be mass murderer ran the AK ( AK47 , WASR , AK74 , VZ58 or whatever ) that fast . Could be anything from bump firing to parts that he made in his garage.

[zacbol]

Zacbol, I agree that most of us would e concerned to get to safety even if carrying. You never know how many more there are, and we are responsible for our own.

HOWEVER, the point of CCW is that if several people there and nearby were carrying then there are OPTIONS. People outside would at least have the option to come to the aid of others. Some outside might e friends or family coming in to meet loved ones and would surely come to their aid. And if some inside were carrying then one or two of them might have had the opportunity and reactions to put a stop to it.

Without CCW nobody has much of an option but to hide as best as possible and hope the shooter does not ferret you out.

A lone person carrying may or may not make any difference, but several people carrying makes it much more likely one of them inside the target area or outside it can and will take a shot. So much of the anti-CCW rhetoric focuses on just a single person CCW, when in fact the point is to have as many people carrying as possible to improve the odds against a surprise attack.

News item just starting to show as "Breaking News" but no article on foxnews.com

Oh, I am absolutely in no ways saying *not* to carry. I guarantee this incident will be used as more 'evidence' that guns are evil (The only article I found is full of that bullshit in the comments). That said, as guilty as the anti-gun folks are of twisting these tragic events into fodder for their belief system, I also sometimes think the pro-gun crowd goes through similar mental gymnastics by treating every shooting as a means by which to fantasize about playing hero. Again, I was not there, and I have no idea what I *would* have done, I have only my mission statement and scenarios I've played out in my head to give me some notion of what I might have done.

To me, it sounds like kaltesherz's father came through this as well as anyone could hope to--with his life. What he could/should have done if he had a weapon is a moral question each of us might answer differently.

As for more people being able to do 'more', I did a few repitions of a mock store robbery/shooting in a tactics class about a year ago. In each case each student was assigned a role known only to himself: aggressor, a normal person, a normal person with a gun, etc. No one knew who was good or bad and many people on both sides had weapons. In many cases, the 'good' folks ended up shooting eachother in the confusion. Or they shot the bad guy before they had determined he had an accomplice and then were shot themselves. I'm not saying it means not to do anything or it's any kind of argument against carrying, I just foudn it an *interesting* data point. For my part, whenever possible as soon as I noticed something 'weird' I tried to leave. That's my plan for real life too. If that doesn't work, if someone needs shot, they need shot.

I think we can all agree this was an absolute tragedy and it's unfortunate none of those who had no choice of escaping did not have a weapon to take care of this piece of crap. I'm only arguing about whether one should involve himself if he'd already escaped. I like to think I would not, but I don't know.

[4x4twenty6]

Just saw it on the news. Glad your father is alive and safe. The death toll is now up to 3. Very Very sad. They think the victims are National Guard Members.

I too would have engaged. No Doubt in my mind. I am confident in my ability as a marksmen and would do my best to stop the threat and reduce injury. Thats why i chose to be a cop. To face those others can not.

If you carry and have the ability to engage and save lives i cannot be sure why one would not do that. Isnt that why most folks carry, to serve as protector of themselves and others.

If a person cannot engage another then that is on them. It is their decision of course. Maybe you are with your family and decide not to engage because of fear you may direct fire towards you and yours, i can see that being a concern. But, who is to say they shooter is not there to execute everyone. Food for thought.