Nice "Classroom" Scene, 20/20!


PDA






jmahalek
April 11, 2009, 09:49 AM
If a gunman walks into a room with a gun drawn and the element of surprise, they will successfully eliminate their target every time. In the classroom scene of 20/20, the shooter first targeted the one student they were observing in each scenario. Nobody would be able to defend themselves in that situation.

Now, if the gunman walked into the classroom and shot randomly, then there is a good chance the armed student could have stopped them before getting hit by a round.

If you enjoyed reading about "Nice "Classroom" Scene, 20/20!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
SCKimberFan
April 11, 2009, 10:10 AM
Aside from their ABC fairy tale, just how would the shooter know which student is armed?

reddog1083
April 11, 2009, 10:14 AM
Well, he does shoot the professor.. and I am guessing out of the corner of your eye, the one person not running/ducking and reaching for something at his or her side would be your obvious candidate for next target... in all fairness.

jmahalek
April 11, 2009, 10:17 AM
Aside from their ABC fairy tale, just how would the shooter know which student is armed?


Exactly my point.

SquirrelNuts
April 11, 2009, 10:20 AM
I am thinking that most people would hit the floor too.

SCKimberFan
April 11, 2009, 10:23 AM
I am thinking that most people would hit the floor too.

As would the armed student, looking for cover to shoot from. Duh!

Hungry Seagull
April 11, 2009, 10:33 AM
And expect other students to clear a firing lane away from armed student as Moses cleared the Sea for the Exodus.

Other students huddle nearby sees armed student with gun and clear away, particularly between armed student and gunman.

That will draw attention right quick.

I love these make believes. What I think will happen in a real class is chaos and books, desks, chairs and bodies all over the place even some attacking the gunman and burying the person.

Maybe the schools Ive attended are the fighting kind, not the sort to meekly sit and get gunned down.

The prof is first to go.

The next student or the fastest onto his or her feet is the next to go. It may take several of these before the rest of the herd stampeded.

Igloodude
April 11, 2009, 12:16 PM
Yeah, there's certainly the potential no-win position - when a mass-murderer (who prior to his murdering was a firearms trainer for the local PD) storms into your classroom and you're just gotten your CCW last week and are carrying with less than a couple hours of range/draw-from-concealment time and are wearing a helmet, you may very well be screwed, whether you have a pistol with you or not. However, if you're carrying a pistol that you've been practicing marksmanship and tactics with for the past several years, and hear gunshots and screaming in the classroom next door... Say, that could well describe individuals at Columbine, Virginia Tech, or Binghamton.

deltastorm11
April 11, 2009, 12:20 PM
Its just amazing how the media feeds the public such bs sometimes!:banghead:

Old Fuff
April 11, 2009, 12:25 PM
Well it’s the morning after the big 20/20 debacle, and everybody is looking for a way to hit back.

Well folks, maybe you will feel better if you understand what the situation really is. This is not the first time a leftist, urban-based television network has pulled off something like this, and it won’t be the last. But because we know how to respond in an effective manner, the ABC Network and 20/20 may get more grief then they handed out.

Why? Because what they presented, and the way they presented it, won’t stand up to critical examination. The show consisted of contrived presentations that didn’t have circumstances that have occurred in real life.

In short, they say for example that if an armed student was in a classroom and someone entered and started shooting the events would come out a certain way; but they can’t point to an example where it did, because so far no school shooter has ever encountered armed resistances from anyone in the room. Hasn’t happened – anywhere.

So what 20/20 showed was conjecture on their part. What we have here is pure propaganda, not news.

So can we nail ABC and 20/20? Probably not, at least directly. But we can go to the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) and file formal complaints against each and every television station that is an ABC affiliate.

To broadcast over the public airwaves they have to have a license from the FCC, and without it they are out of business. That license makes them (not the network) responsible for everything they send out on the airwaves, and carries an obligation to be sure it is truthful and fair to differing point of view – unless it is specifically identified to be an opinion piece or editorial. Even then it may be open to rebuttal from others.

In this context, all of the ABC affiliated stations have got a potentially serious problem this morning. If challenged, and they will be, they must convince the FCC that, that pile of garbage 20/20 put out meets the Commission’s standards for news – and I don’t think they can do it. If they can’t some serious sanctions could come down on their heads. :eek:

Now do you feel better?? :)

So remember, go after the individual stations, not the ABC Network or 20/20. They will get what they have coming later. Point out that the show consisted of contrived examples, presented only one viewpoint, and they were not supported by independent evidence.

http://esupport.fcc.gov/complaints.htm

deltastorm11
April 11, 2009, 12:28 PM
BTW could someone give me a link where i could find this video, I cant seem to find it all on youtube.

98C5
April 11, 2009, 12:31 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/2020

Click on "If I had a gun"

deltastorm11
April 11, 2009, 12:34 PM
Thanks 98C5, its a shame I missed abc's insightful documentary lol.:D

Deltaboy
April 11, 2009, 12:37 PM
It is easy with actors to set a show where the BG always wins.

mbt2001
April 11, 2009, 12:42 PM
lol

This video is funny...

It is as based in non-reality as a video game.

They primed the kids for something. They then had them wait in that setting. Then they sent in 1 or 2 very experienced shooters that KNEW what was coming and KNEW this was a game. In REAL LIFE, the defender would be relaxed and the SHOOTER would be keyed up like no tomorrow.

So it was a complete reversal. Also, they sat each person in the same place, I bet the "cop" new that, because he avoided other targets to engage the "armed" person. It is a lie, a fantasy.

Neezer
April 11, 2009, 12:42 PM
Wyatt Earp couldn't have drawn a gun with that extra, extra, extra long tee-shirt that ABC made those stooges wear.

I also loved the staged "hidden camera" scenes of children locked in a room with only guns to play with, and teenagers hired to clean a garage where a paid actor encourages them to look down the barrel of a loaded gun.

After I stopped laughing, I turned the show off.... The ethical journalism train has clearly left the ABC station.

shotgunjoel
April 11, 2009, 12:44 PM
Well, when you give everybody huge baggy shirts, it is going to impead your draw.

mbt2001
April 11, 2009, 01:19 PM
What training program did Audie Murphy go through to jump on the back of a flaming tank and successfully engage all of those Germans? These kind of experiments would prove to you that it COULDN'T have happened.

Listen and Learn ABC you hacks...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rj3JOmYPh-0

Blackbeard
April 11, 2009, 01:42 PM
the one person not running/ducking and reaching for something at his or her side would be your obvious candidate for next target... in all fairness.

Yes, and ABC made sure that every other person ran because they knew it was coming and reacted instantly. The poor sucker, er I mean test subject, was the only one taken by surprise, and the first one targeted after the professor, every time.

Phydeaux642
April 11, 2009, 03:10 PM
ABC's, or any others for that matter, fantasy scenarios are just silly as no one knows what he/she will do in any given situation until you are faced with it.

hacksaw
April 11, 2009, 03:20 PM
I just happened to tune in to 20/20 last night during the classroom scenes. I would love to challenge Sawyer et. al. to replicate this scenario. ONLY this time we wont tell her who the armed student is.

I wonder if Miculek or Leatham are busy that day.....just a thought:evil:

gym
April 11, 2009, 03:35 PM
I shut it right off, the wife wanted to watch it, I told her to go in another room if that was what she wanted to watch. It was a political message that this administrqtion and ABC is not just taking an anti-gun, but liars and manipulators of the truth.I really got sick to my stomach watching the first few minutes. That is not juornalism it belongs with Jerry Springer, or lower, at least Jerry doesn't try to present himself as a news network. He cals it like he sees it, this was realy trash, I can't even put it into words how low this stations has sank, as they have violated the publics trust and that is unforgivable for a news organization and you don't get that back

Gamera
April 11, 2009, 03:58 PM
I just watch that clip and it's total BS for all of the reasons listed above.
Grrrrrr.

JKimball
April 11, 2009, 04:52 PM
I don't think it was total BS. It actually made some valid points that are worthwhile for us to consider:

1. If you carry a gun, use a holster and concealment that you have trained with so you can get it out without delay.

2. Before you think "gun", think "cover."

3. Be prepared to get shot if you engage in a gunfight, and don't let it stop you.

4. You can't miss fast enough to win a gunfight. Train to get a sight picture and good trigger press while shooting under stress.

5. Training is crucial. This was a very difficult scenario for the ccw'ers. There was almost no time to recognize a threat before the shooting started. There could have been a myriad of variations of this scenario where even these first time CCW'ers would have had a decent chance at taking out the shooter and surviving, but for something like this, it would take some serious training. These things can happen a lot faster than we think.

If the point of the show was that just having a gun doesn't make you safe, then they were absolutely correct. If their point was that nobody should carry a gun on college campuses because in this certain scenario these first time ccw'ers were killed anyway, then that is ridiculous.

At one point in the segment she said there has been no study done showing that being armed keeps you safe. I'd like to refer her to Clayton Cramer's Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog:
http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html

I agree to make it more realistic they should have chosen a student to be the murderer, rather than the range instructor from the police department. And they should only tell him to go in there and kill the professor and as many students as he could, with no mention that one of the students may be armed. And they should have chosen a student from the local IDPA club to be the armed student in the classroom. Because in reality, that is who would be carrying there, if he was allowed.

Zoogster
April 11, 2009, 05:30 PM
There was two shooters, the second was a backup just in case someone managed to beat the intentionaly stacked odds. They neglected to show him or that they scored many of the hits until near the end.

Landor
April 11, 2009, 05:48 PM
I would like to see a cop in that scenario show us how their training would of allowed them to survive that same scenario.

Prion
April 11, 2009, 05:58 PM
We need info on airdate, times, etc in order to fill out the FCC complaint form. I don't usually watch this garbage but I'll be happy to file a complaint if I could get a link to the video and if someone could give me an airdate.

xwingband
April 11, 2009, 06:03 PM
lol, I know the head gear is for safety, but dang is that restrictive. Realistic my butt...

TRGRHPY
April 11, 2009, 06:05 PM
ARlover: It was ABC 20/20 Time was 11pm EST, so the time of airing will vary depending on where you live.

Old Fuff
April 11, 2009, 06:14 PM
Follow this link to find the ABC Station in your area.


http://abc.go.com/site/localstations.html

Go to "Schedule" > 20/20 for a full screen of information.

ezypikns
April 11, 2009, 06:22 PM
that when a gun is drawn and used against other human beings, BAAAAAD things always happen. Where are the statistics showing the number of innocent lives saved? They seem to be saying that even the death of a criminal (killed by a law abiding gun owner) is a terrible thing.

The program leaves me more than a little discouraged. Thank the Good Lord that more and more people see this for what it is. We have legislation pending here in Texas that will allow licensed CHL holders (teachers AND students) to carry on our state college campuses.

I went to the range this afternoon and there were LOTS of NEW shooters there. All having a great time. Safely.

Now THAT's good news.

Taptaps
April 11, 2009, 06:33 PM
The only point they proved was one we all already know to be true:
An ambush is very effective and a gun drawn beats a gun in a holster.
But, I don't think anyone of us with a brain thinks that we can defeat someone who is already aiming down on us when we don't have our weapon drawn.

Now, in real life, you may be out of the focus of the shooter, you may be down the hall, across the street. These incidents have often continued on from the place they originated to another location because no one was able to stop the shooter. That is where and when we could end it.

Even if you are in the room where it starts, you can get cover, if fortune favors you on that day, and get an effective shot off if the shooter is focused on one of the many other possible targets he would be dealing with. Unfortunately, it is almost certain that the shooter would take lives, no matter how quickly someone is able to put him down. But, again, an ambush is effective.

If you enjoyed reading about "Nice "Classroom" Scene, 20/20!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!