Courthouse shooting video


PDA






Preacherman
June 28, 2006, 02:02 PM
I did a search for this, but couldn't find any other threads on it, so here goes.

The link below takes you to a video of a courthouse shooting in Tyler, TX. The action moves from there to a car chase of the suspect, who is eventually shot (on camera) by a policeman. Probably a "not safe for work" video - or for kids.

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/videos/courthouse-psycho.html

If you enjoyed reading about "Courthouse shooting video" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Punkermonkey
June 28, 2006, 03:07 PM
I remember that. Wasn't a civilian involved in that too? IIRC a very brave gentleman from the building across the street attempted to intervene with his .45 and wound up distracting the shooter long enough for the officers to arrive before he was gunned down. It was said that he saved one of the intended victims lives.

As a side note, the narrator describes the weapons fire as coming from a machine gun. I love me some media ignorance.

Hoppy590
June 28, 2006, 03:29 PM
so was this guy wearing body armor or are these cops just really bad shots?

Punkermonkey
June 28, 2006, 03:33 PM
I believe he was wearing body armor.

geekWithA.45
June 28, 2006, 04:03 PM
He was wearing armor.

A brave gentleman named Mark Allen Wilson stepped up to the plate with his 1911, unknowingly taking cover behind the perpetrator's getaway vehicle. IIRC, he hit the perp several times, without effect.

The lesson learned is to keep a long gun handy.


edited to add:

Just watched the clip.

They completely blew off Mr. Wilson.

Wes Janson
June 28, 2006, 09:54 PM
They didn't mention him at all in the video. Gotta love how they focused on that "courageous" camerman who didn't even have the guts to go near a window, while not even speaking the name of the citizen who did fight back, and lost.

Note that at the end of the chase, the officer with the Colt fired multiple shots, but it looks like his first (and clearest) shot missed, and then he hit with the second right before the suspect reached concealment (not exactly cover from a .223). I wonder if he jerked the trigger on that, or didn't align his sights, or what. Unfortunately not a question Dateline or World's Scariest Blah Blah Videos is going to know to ask :/

rbernie
June 28, 2006, 10:10 PM
They completely blew off Mr. WilsonDude lays down his life to protect a stranger and doesn't ever warrant a mention. If that's not an example of media bias, I dunno what is. There is no way that the narrator/reporter could have reasonably not known about Wilson's intervention and heroism. *THAT* chaps my fanny.... :fire:

I think you've got to give props to Sgt Jacks, who ultimately took down Arroyo. Riding into the courthouse square on the hood of the squad car to intervene was, to my untrained eye, a ballsy and pretty smart move. I was impressed.

XavierBreath
June 28, 2006, 10:54 PM
The media bias is eternal. Texans, however, did not forget Mark Wilson. God bless Texas.

Texas House Resolution No. 740 (http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlo/79R/billtext/HR00740F.HTM)

R E S O L U T I O N

WHEREAS, The tragic death of Mark Alan Wilson of Tyler on
February 24, 2005, at the age of 52, has brought a profound loss to
his many friends and loved ones; and
WHEREAS, With instinctive courage and selfless resolve, this
valorous Texan confronted a gunman on the steps of the Smith County
Courthouse; reacting to the kind of inhuman crisis that compels
ordinary men to seek cover or flee, Mark Wilson proved to be an
extraordinary man; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Wilson confronted a lethal threat in order to
protect the people of his community, and in his valiant attempt to
save the lives of others, he risked his own safety; and
WHEREAS, The magnitude of the sacrifice that ended his life
all too prematurely is in keeping with the character that was
evident to all who knew him; an active member of the Tyler
community, he used his time on earth to the fullest; and
WHEREAS, Born on January 20, 1953, in Dallas, Mr. Wilson
graduated from MacArthur High School in 1971 and went on to serve
his country with distinction in the U.S. Navy; after his discharge
from the military, this avid sportsman worked as a racquetball
instructor and embraced his entrepreneurial spirit, opening
Tyler's On Target Shooting Range in 1997; and
WHEREAS, A dedicated volunteer, he committed his talents to
help raise money for nonprofit organizations and lent his time to
Heart of Tyler/Main Street projects, including the Texas Blues
Festival and Festival on the Square; and
WHEREAS, Mark Wilson was a true hero, and his example reminds
us that the very best elements of human nature can emerge in the
midst of the chaos and violence that threaten our society; though
this brave man will be missed, his legacy will continue to inspire
all who are privileged to know of him; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives of the 79th Texas
Legislature hereby pay special tribute to the life of Mark Alan
Wilson of Tyler and extend deepest sympathy to the members of his
family: to his parents, Alex and Lynn Stewart; to his sisters,
Melody and Holly Wilson; to his nieces, Katie and Kristen DeFazio;
and to his other relatives and many friends; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That an official copy of this resolution be
prepared for his family and that when the Texas House of
Representatives adjourns this day, it do so in memory of Mark Alan
Wilson.

Berman

______________________________
Speaker of the House

I certify that H.R. No. 740 was unanimously adopted
by arising vote of the House on March 31, 2005.

______________________________
Chief Clerk of the House


More (http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/ccw/tacoma_tyler.htm)

JohnKSa
June 28, 2006, 11:45 PM
A brave gentleman named Mark Allen Wilson stepped up to the plate with his 1911, unknowingly taking cover behind the perpetrator's getaway vehicle. IIRC, he hit the perp several times, without effect.The Sheriff's spokesman said that Mr. Wilson's intervention almost certainly saved lives. While his shots may not have killed the shooter, those at the scene were quite certain that they had a definite beneficial effect.

There was some speculation at the time that at least one of Mr. Wilson's shots injured the shooter in an area not covered by the body armor and may have been the reason he left the scene when he did.

Some links with amplifying information.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=127296&
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=127921&
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=127277&
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=127187&

nico
June 29, 2006, 02:14 AM
They completely blew off Mr. Wilson.
that's the first thing that came to mind when they showed the security camera shot. I'm sure they'd say it was just an oversight though:barf: :fire:

YellowLab
June 29, 2006, 09:52 AM
WHY did the cops engage the shooter with pistols?

Perp has RANGE and POWER on his side. Plus a 30 round magazine.

Cops did not properly evaluate the situation, but that went into fight or flight mode.

I do not see this as a good LEO response, there was only 1 rifle in the entire police force available within X minutes?

Citizen did a good thing, he's DEAD, hope thats some consolation to the family.

All in all I call this a cluster F--- on all accounts.
Cop rode around ON THE HOOD OF THE CRUISER? NO COVER, NO COCEALMENT, NO RETREAT, NO STABLE SHOOTING PLATFORM. That nut went into HERO mode... not smart.

Cops would lose cover to take a shot.. why not run the SOB over in a car?

Why not CONTAIN the situation and wait for appropiate backup?

Sucks that people died... but so many BAD DECISIONS on part of LEO that just shows that they are not well prepared, well trained or have good judgement.

geekWithA.45
June 29, 2006, 03:16 PM
WHY did the cops engage the shooter with pistols?

Because it was the guns they HAD.

IIRC, there's a saying about the gun ya brung, being better than one locked up @ the armory...as was most likely the case here.

Engaging the perp, even with suboptimal arms denied him complete freedom of action, which is a good thing.

The TJ Hooker cruiser hood maneuver was a bit strange, but I believe the intent was to get to the fight rapidly, jump off, and engage the perp while he was still on foot.

(Dragoons, I believe, were soldiers who rode horses into battle, dismounted, and then fought on foot rather than horseback....same basic idea.)

As for containment, how exactly would you go about that?

Shoot him? Tackle him? Ring him round in yellow "Police Scene, do not cross" tape? It's pretty hard to contain an armored, well armed uncooperative subject.

I'm not sure you'd even WANT to deny him vehicle use, since that takes the gunfight to somewhere other than mainstreet, usa. The alternative would be the fight moving off the town square on foot and into....where? Restaurant and hostages, maybe?

To your point, the choices they made weren't great, but they weren't that bad.

The lesson the cops should take away is the same one we did:

Have rifles handy.

rbernie
June 29, 2006, 03:50 PM
All in all I call this a cluster F--- on all accounts. C'mon - let's be fair. The situation was unexpected, and as a result the reaction was understandably fluid and uncoordinated.

The TJ Hooker cruiser hood maneuver was a bit strange, but I believe the intent was to get to the fight rapidly, jump off, and engage the perp while he was still on foot.My perspective was that it allowed the officer to get into the fight no matter what was going on. Had the officer been inside the patrol car, his ability to scan and return fire to any direction would have been vastly reduced and his ability to respond would have been constrained by the physical limitations imposed by the need to exit the vehicle.

In my view, the officer placed himself outside of some minimal cover (doors, windshield) to gain the advantage of situational awareness and mobility. It still looks like a pretty smart move to me, at least until the more formally trained amongst y'all properly set me straight. :)

Steve in PA
June 29, 2006, 04:00 PM
"WHY did the cops engage the shooter with pistols?

Perp has RANGE and POWER on his side. Plus a 30 round magazine.

Cops did not properly evaluate the situation, but that went into fight or flight mode.

I do not see this as a good LEO response, there was only 1 rifle in the entire police force available within X minutes?

Citizen did a good thing, he's DEAD, hope thats some consolation to the family.

All in all I call this a cluster F--- on all accounts.
Cop rode around ON THE HOOD OF THE CRUISER? NO COVER, NO COCEALMENT, NO RETREAT, NO STABLE SHOOTING PLATFORM. That nut went into HERO mode... not smart.

Cops would lose cover to take a shot.. why not run the SOB over in a car?

Why not CONTAIN the situation and wait for appropiate backup?

Sucks that people died... but so many BAD DECISIONS on part of LEO that just shows that they are not well prepared, well trained or have good judgement."


So........the cops did a bad thing by engaging the shooter, but the citizen did a good thing by engaging the shooter? :scrutiny:

And as far as "contain the situation and wait for backup".......um, is that what they did at Columbine? Seems everyone was screaming why didn't the police charge right in.

Amazing :banghead:

YellowLab
June 29, 2006, 07:14 PM
Wow.. you people think that a decree from the legislature about your 'HEROIC DEATH' is a good thing? A shooting retreat, or if you know all hope is lost a charge... but time to take 6+ shots? The citizen had to have lost situational awareness as the BG was coming right at him. Lay on the ground and shoot his feet off.... take the time for a head shot.... do what you need to do to increase your odds of ending the threat. COM is not working.... switch to head/legs/arms. Who waits that long in a SHTF scenario? GET OUT OF DODGE and live to tell the tale.

Did you watch the video? When LEOs were at the courthouse door? Getting clobbered? About 6 LEOs total?

Yes you can contain the situation..... IF HE CAN'T SEE YOU you odds of getting shot go WAY DOWN. Get the sheep out of the way and hold up. It will be dynamic... but less blood on the street that taking pot shots when you are outgunned and out armoured.

When T.J. HOOKER (Sgt. Jacks?) shows up and rides the hood of the patrol car to his death, hopefully you can get his AR before the BG.

COME ON... how F'in REDICULOUS was that LEO on the hood of the car? He wanted to be free to move? He had BETTER BE FREE TO MOVE his ass is in the open, with no chance of getting a shot off. I would kick that LEO off whatever SWAT unit he is in... COME ON... RIDING ON THE HOOD OF A CAR TO ENGAGE A BG? :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Patrol LEOs are NOT trained or equiped to stop an armoured BG with an assault rifle. Someone PLEASE put that in the memo and get it out ASAP. And the second memo is for the SWAT team. LAYING ON THE HOOD OF A CAR INTO AN ENGAGEMENT IS NOT COVER, IS NOT CONCEALMENT, IS NOT A GOOD SHOOTING PLATFORM, AND THAT BULLET YOU GET FROM THE BG WILL INHIBIT YOUR FREEDOM TO MOVE AROUND.

Tokugawa
June 29, 2006, 08:17 PM
well it's real easy to second guess, I am glad those cops stepped up to the plate. Yeah , maybe they need more training or a rifle handier, but THEY were the ones who were there. They had the essential ingredient - courage. So what are ya gonna do? Hole up in the courthouse behind cover while a guy goes down the street killing people ? Apparently in Texas, the law still believes they are there to "Serve and Protect", and are willing to put thier ass on the line to do it.

Double Naught Spy
June 29, 2006, 08:21 PM
Getting back on track, I thought the video quite poor. It portrayed the cops as inept hero baffoons, which they were not...with the possible exception of the SWAT officer and his Colt "Command" AR15 made for precision shooting that is actually a Colt "Commando" AR15 with an 11.5" barrel that is hardly a precision AR15. Nobody in their right mind rides around on the front of a car like he did. There are many ways to ride on top of a car and that has to be about the worst one.

It sucks the vid left out the part about Mark Wilson. That just isn't right.

I was surprised to find the video produced by Court TV. Their stuff often seems pretty good.

geekWithA.45
June 29, 2006, 09:24 PM
The citizen had to have lost situational awareness as the BG was coming right at him. Lay on the ground and shoot his feet off.... take the time for a head shot....

Yellowlab, if you knew what you were talking about, you'd know that Mark Wilson inadvertently took cover behind Arroyo's truck. Arroyo was shot by Wilson while in the middle of street. He and Wilson exchanged shots from either side of Arroyos truck. Wilson went prone to shoot under the truck, Arroyo ran around truck, Wilson turned to run and was shot in the back of the head. Arroyo then stood over and shot him multiple times, then left in his truck.

As for head shots...well, paper doesn't shoot back, now does it? Nor does it stand still. Nor do you, in that situation.

Mark Allen Wilson did a lot of reasonable things, and died as a result of the fortunes of combat.

Anyone who carries a gun (and even folks who don't) should get used to the idea that they can do everything right, avoid all mistakes, and still get killed.


Gunfights are entirely "come as you are" affairs, and I'd rather see good people doing _something_, rather than waiting around for the cavalry while a madman runs amok.

The perfect is the enemy of the good.

Steve in PA
June 29, 2006, 09:26 PM
I remember seeing the video on tv and thought, what the hell is he doing?

But I wasn't there. I doubt I would ever do something like that, but to those there it sounded like a good idea.

pcf
June 29, 2006, 10:45 PM
COME ON... how F'in REDICULOUS was that LEO on the hood of the car? He wanted to be free to move? He had BETTER BE FREE TO MOVE his ass is in the open, with no chance of getting a shot off. I would kick that LEO off whatever SWAT unit he is in... COME ON... RIDING ON THE HOOD OF A CAR TO ENGAGE A BG?

Patrol LEOs are NOT trained or equiped to stop an armoured BG with an assault rifle. Someone PLEASE put that in the memo and get it out ASAP. And the second memo is for the SWAT team. LAYING ON THE HOOD OF A CAR INTO AN ENGAGEMENT IS NOT COVER, IS NOT CONCEALMENT, IS NOT A GOOD SHOOTING PLATFORM, AND THAT BULLET YOU GET FROM THE BG WILL INHIBIT YOUR FREEDOM TO MOVE AROUND.

Why don't you you tell us how much safer he would have been from close range RIFLE fire inside of the vehicle? Getting trapped inside a vehicle, when the BG has a rifle isn't a favorable situation either. The officer driving pulled up right behind the BG's vehicle. If the BG got out, and both officers were in the vehicle, he'd be shooting fish in a barrel. Or where should he have been?

Was the hood of a car a bad place to be, absolutely. But charging into a gunfight is always a bad place to be.


Yes you can contain the situation..... IF HE CAN'T SEE YOU you odds of getting shot go WAY DOWN. Get the sheep out of the way and hold up. It will be dynamic... but less blood on the street that taking pot shots when you are outgunned and out armoured.

Cover is good...getting trapped behind cover, losing sight of the enemy, getting flanked or out maneuvered effectively negates the use of cover.

JohnKSa
June 29, 2006, 10:54 PM
getting trapped behind cover, losing sight of the enemy, getting flanked or out maneuvered effectively negates the use of cover.Proved by Mr. Wilson earlier that day...

Dmack_901
June 29, 2006, 10:54 PM
The lesson learned is to keep a long gun handy.Or, AP handguns save lives.

XavierBreath
June 30, 2006, 06:44 AM
Anyone who carries a gun (and even folks who don't) should get used to the idea that they can do everything right, avoid all mistakes, and still get killed.Very well said sir!
The entire post.

YellowLab
June 30, 2006, 09:17 AM
I COMPLETELY agree that you can do it 'by the book' and still lose.

And the video that I saw did not show anything about the citizen.

I DO commend the fact that he had the presence of mind to defend himiself... and not freeze up when the lead started to fly.

I DO NOT commend the LEO actions. One post mentioned that the video made the police look like bafoons... no, the video captured the LEO's making so many bad decisions that they looked like bafoons.

Someone please tell the LEOs that they are not trained or equipped to take on an armed/armoured aggressor. I know its not as manly to tell stories about how you GOT THE F OUT OF THERE, but since the LA Bank hold up incndent (so similiar its not funny) it seems that NOTHING has been learned or changed to correct the deficiences.

rbernie
June 30, 2006, 10:06 AM
I DO commend the fact that he had the presence of mind to defend himiself... and not freeze up when the lead started to fly.Actually, as I hear things he was a bystander (lived nearby and saw it starting) and dove in to help.

mcg-doc
June 30, 2006, 10:20 AM
Iím no expert on tactical encounters. However, I did notice that there were other cars (a patrol cruiser, and a white pickup) in the general direction of the perpetrator. The police officer fires multiple shots at his intended target. Does this endanger occupants of the other cars? Why didnít the officer with the rifle attempt to disable the perps truck? How do departments train for such encounters?

I think it would be very interesting to hear an opinion of a peace officer.

pcf
June 30, 2006, 10:47 AM
I DO NOT commend the LEO actions. One post mentioned that the video made the police look like bafoons... no, the video captured the LEO's making so many bad decisions that they looked like bafoons.

Yellowlab,
Talk is cheap, those "Bafoons" had seconds to make decisions, you've had 24 hours, and the best you've come up with is........nothing.

Situation: They're outgunned by a madman that's trying to murder them.
Solution 1: Find cover, maintain a low profile, and hope that the madman that's trying to murder them, doesn't continue to try to murder them. Afterall the shooter was there only to murder his wife and son, the assault rifle, body armor, and extra ammo, wasn't for killing anyone else that he could find.
Solution 2: Call in the SWAT team that can take an hour to muster, assemble and deploy, and call for a sixty minute intermission with the madman.

Situation: Officers don't have the tools to combat armored madman.
Solution: Get in a time machine or engage in alchemy to procure appropiate tools, or give up and hope they don't get murdered.

Situation: Officer shouldn't be on hood of car.
Solution: Officer shouldn't be on hood of car.

As far as the "bafoons" at the entrance of the court house, all six of them, their mission is to protect the court house. They were in defensible position, they held the shooter at bay, they accomplished their mission. Real bafoons there, what were they thinking?:rolleyes: Those guys should have taken cover, after all the chap was just there to murder his wife and son, with an rifle, body armor, and extra ammo.

The officer on the hood of the car should have been on the trunk. What he would have lost in situational awareness, would have more than made up by increased crash protection, protection from the vehicle, and increased maneuverability.

Matt G
June 30, 2006, 01:08 PM
I’m no expert on tactical encounters. However, I did notice that there were other cars (a patrol cruiser, and a white pickup) in the general direction of the perpetrator. The police officer fires multiple shots at his intended target. Does this endanger occupants of the other cars? Why didn’t the officer with the rifle attempt to disable the perps truck? How do departments train for such encounters?

I think it would be very interesting to hear an opinion of a peace officer.

I was looking at that, too. The closeup of the pickup implies that the pickup was in the background when Sgt. Jacks made the killshot. If you look carefully, though (I ran it back several times), the shot enters from the right passenger side rear window at a high angle before traversing the cab of the truck to kill the bad guy. The video is a compendium of several dash cameras at that point, and I believe that the dash camera catching the kill shot there was in a patrol car situated much, much further to the left of the police marksman. Another dash cam on a patrol car further to the right records Sgt. Jacks firing. It's easy to perceive it all as being from the same camera, which would put the truck in the line of fire. I suspect that the Sergeant had a good clear field of fire, with the truck off to his right, which would explain why he ran 'way over to the far right like he did-- hardly a perfect firing angle, but the safest for bystanders.

Note that Sgt. Jacks didn't shoot from behind a patrol car, which would have provided some cover and a shooting rest. Any trained rifleman will attempt to make use of support whenever possible, and anyone under fire would seek out cover whenever possible. But Sgt. Jack stands on his hind legs, out in the open, to make his shot from a sub-optimal angle? Why?

Because he was taking into account the lives of the citizens beyond the bad guy.


With regard to disabling the vehicle-- it's easier said than done. Trying to do so to a moving vehicle in an urban environment endangers lots of people, inasmuch as you may be shooting at a moving vehicle. A pickup on the straightaway is a hard vehicle to disable for a patrol car. The deputy did a decent job, I thought, and intelligently got out of the way when the guy jumped out.

Shooting tires, in my professional experience, is pretty unrewarding. .45 acp bullets put holes of only the size of the meplat or hollowpoint into the sidewalls of the tires. .223's would likely put pinpricks into them. Now, at high speeds, it's more efficient at shredding them. But at low speeds, you find yourself wondering why the tire isn't deflating or blowing up like it does in the movies.

Similarly, the gas tank, which is mighty hard to hit on most pickups, would simply create a slow and inefficient leak-- they just don't blow up like in the movies. (Not even with tracer ammo, surprisingly.)


Was riding around on the hood the BEST way to respond? Probably not. But I suspect that the officer thought that the pickup was just around the corner, and that as soon as he made it, he'd slide off and engage, without being constrained in the car. Probably better would have been to sit on the open windowsill, if there wasn't an MDT blocking his ability to hook his feet under the dashboard on the passenger side. Still, getting out and moving would have been difficult.

To the detractors of the cops who ran to the sound of rifle fire, I question how you would have dealt with the situation. These officers engaged the shooter because it was their duty. While I agree 100% that every one of those officers on the scene should have had a rifle and a shotgun in their vehicles, many PDs haven't yet realized that a rifle is a far safer way to engage a shooter than a pistol, for the citizenry at large. Most street officers know this, and many admin types know this, but they oftentimes have to get their SOP approved through city council types, who don't know this, and who are terrified of the "militarization of the police." Heck, give 'em all M-94s. Give 'em Remington 7400's. Give 'em 870's with good sights, slings, and slugs.

Give 'em what they need to stop the fight.

Give 'em support.

Correia
June 30, 2006, 01:26 PM
Ahh, the power of the internet. Where people who have never done anything dangerous in their lives can question and condemn people who fought through actual gunfights.

Oh my gosh! You mean the cops didn't do everything PERFECT in the few seconds of terror that they actually had to decide and committ to a course of action?

I'm positive that the average poster on THR could have done so much better.

LanEvo`
June 30, 2006, 02:18 PM
Getting back on track, I thought the video quite poor. It portrayed the cops as inept hero baffoons, which they were not...with the possible exception of the SWAT officer and his Colt "Command" AR15 made for precision shooting that is actually a Colt "Commando" AR15 with an 11.5" barrel that is hardly a precision AR15.There were tons of errors in the reporting (as you'd expect). Not only the Colt "Command." They also say the suspect was firing an "AK-47 assault rifle" and refer to "automatic weapons fire strafing the courthouse." I seem to remember that it was, in fact, a semi-auto SKS. I guess "full-auto AK-47 assault rifle" sounds more salacious to the newsman types.

It sucks the vid left out the part about Mark Wilson. That just isn't right.That was a real shocker. Wilson sees a man on a shooting spree, grabs his 1911, and runs in to help the innocent victims. But he's outgunned. He loses his life after a valiant struggle. Not many people would have done the same. This man is a hero. Yet, the (bumbling?) SWAT officer and cowardly TV cameraman are portrayed as the heros. We don't even get a mention of Wilson's supreme sacrifice. To add insult to injury, I remember reading that the police on the scene credited Wilson with saving Arroyo's son. So it looks like even the police recognized how important he was.

I suppose the newsmedia aren't interested in telling the tale of a responsible, civic-minded, well-trained, armed citizen who selflessly risks his own life to save a child from his homicidal father :fire:

Matt G
June 30, 2006, 03:40 PM
Regarding shooting angles: Note this shot of Sgt. Jacks moving forward from the right-most cruiser's dashcam:
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=41677&stc=1&d=1151695915

Then notice the location of the impacts of these last two shots by Sgt Jacks:
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=41678&stc=1&d=1151695915
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=41679&stc=1&d=1151695915

I got these screen captures while watching the slightly superior video hosted here: http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/35766/Gun_Fight_Outside_The_Court_House.html

BB93YJ
June 30, 2006, 05:29 PM
Mark Wilson wasn't your everday pistol totin' wannabe either. Had a bit of training, obviously, and ran an indoor shooting range there in Tyler, on the Loop.

Sheldon J
June 30, 2006, 06:37 PM
Those LEO's are in serious need of range time, that many guns throwing that much lead and no one hits him, when under pressure only reflexive shooting works, and that takes practice.:what:

ProficientRifleman
June 30, 2006, 08:22 PM
Just some thoughts...

1. All victims were disarmed. Everyone was hoping SOMEONE would do something.

2. When I was a kid growing up in West Texas, most pick-em-up trucks could be seen with rifles and/or shotguns in their rear windows. You rarely see that today, even in Texas. Does anyone remember Charles Whitman and the Univ. of Texas tower? Local good folks grabbed their rifles and engaged the bad guy. By the way, this is how the good folks of Coffeyville Kansas defended themselves against the Dalton gang also...and beat them.

3. I commend the cops for moving toward the bad guy and engaging him, but none (that I saw on the video) attempted to use cover. It would occur to me to find cover and engage the bad guy from there.

4. I remember seing a news story a few years ago about a county sheriff's deputy who had a HUGE area to cover in Alaska. He got a call to BOLO for a truck and several occupants who are suspects in a bank robery. A few minutes later that very truck passed him on the highway. He turned and got after them. He held them at gunpoint in somewhat of a "meskin standoff". Finally a vehicle approached. The deputy waved the vehicle down and asked it the occupant had a weapon with him. The citizen replied, "Of course I do..."
The officer then had the citizen help him cover the suspects while he arrested them.

5. A proposal before the committee:

Whereas, there will be bad guys in our society always,

And whereas, the bad guys will always find ways of acquiring weapons,

And whereas, there will always be many more good citizens in society than bad guys,

Be it resolved that all good citizens should acquire arms and be well trained in their use, and be willing in a moment's notice to use them in defense against common thuggery and lawlessness, and be on notice from this day forward that is THEIR responsibility to render society safe and peaceful.

All in favor, say AYE!

JohnKSa
June 30, 2006, 10:17 PM
The video is well done, but I find it disgusting that Mr. Wilson is not even mentioned.

He was not a target and yet he chose to enter the situation and by his actions and at the cost of his own life, he saved lives and most likely provided the motivation which caused the shooter to leave the scene. Seems like that's worth at least a mention.

Anybody know how to figure out who made the video? I have something to say to them.

Don't Tread On Me
July 1, 2006, 06:00 AM
All I can say is WOW.

For anyone that's read my posts or remembers my posts around here, they'll know that I'm the first one to criticize, scrutinize, question, and argue against the police and their tactics...

That being said, there is absolutely ZERO blame, complaint, condemnation or anything negative to say about any part of the police response in this situation whatsoever.

The police did the best they could in a situation that, obviously, a large number of THR members seem to have serious difficulty understanding and putting all the aspects of this dangerous, high-speed, high-stress situation in perspective.


I'm not even going to debate all the various points and details involved. It should be a given.

+1 to the cops, and Wilson.

If you enjoyed reading about "Courthouse shooting video" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!