change ccw after el paso?

Status
Not open for further replies.
jeepnik said:
As I understand it, no one in El Paso was armed and able to shoot back.
Click to expand...
Proponents of racially invidious gun controls like it that way. It makes things easier for the killer, with whom their REAL sympathies lie.

This was demonstrated by an Ohio State employee who railed at the police for shooting the Ohio State "car and knife" jihadi.

I went up in caliber after the previous serious of islamist attacks.
 
newfalguy101 said:
I dont have a ccw nor do I carry.
I have kicked the idea around for a while but simply cant justify it.

Look, I am a homebody that rarely goes places that realisticly increase my odds of ever needing to defend myself.

I live in a quiet town where not much happens.

I inderstand that bad stuff happens everywhere, I also know that statistics tell me it is unlikely to happen here....I accept that the odds are in my favor.

Most of the guys I know, got their CHPs because they could, not because they felt they NEEDED to.
Click to expand...
I'm sure those women in that Tinley Park, IL Lane Bryant thought the same thing. I've been to Tinley Park many times. It's not exactly South Central.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_Bryant_shooting
 
Jeb Stuart said:
Really, yet the man that was shot and did the interview talks about how he was near the gunman and started throwing cans at him. Then when the shooter took notice, he shot him. A 380 at that range from someone trained with a pocket gun very well could have taken him down. People always under estimate the Pocket gun.

What would I have done? Most likely, ducked down, draw my weapon and try and figure out what the hell was going on, where the shots were coming from and move away from the shooter and toward a exit. But who really knows. The man throwing cans talked about how little children were being shot. That would certainly cause a intense anger in me. Where that anger would take me, I do not know.

El Paso victim throws cans. Man of courage.

Click to expand...



You can also kill deer with a 22.

There is a huge difference between getting caught up in the heat of the moment, and taking a shot of opportunity with a 380 at a guy armed with an AR, versus putting your 380 in your pocket with a plan to engage active shooters armed with rifles.
 
JohnKSa said:
Ok, I went the other way since I was trying to be very conservative, and estimated that only 1000 people in the store were NOT Mexican nationals. I also used the overall statistics for the state, not the figures for El Paso County.

So let's use the press estimate and the permit holder numbers/population for the county in which El Paso is located to try to get a rough feel for how many permit holders were likely on hand.

~850,000 persons living in El Paso County in 2018
~19,350 permit holders in El Paso County in 2018 (Based on the percentage of permits issued in El Paso County in 2018 (1.42%) vs. the total # of active permits in 2018)

That indicates that ~1 person in 44 are permit holders in El Paso County, compared to ~ 1 person in 28 or 29 for the entire state.

~2000 TX citizens present in the WalMart at the time of the shooting based on the press estimate.

One could therefore expect that there would be in the neighborhood of 44 permit holders present in the store at the time of the shooting.

My original estimate, based on the overall permit figures for TX and assuming only 1000 TX citizens in the store, was that it was likely that there were about 34 permit holders present.

If we want to be very conservative, we could assume that the estimate has a relatively large error and cut the numbers in half just to be really sure that we're not overestimating the number of permit holders present. If we do that, we still arrive at an estimate of 20+ permit holders in the store.

I think it's quite safe to assume that there were 15+ permit holders present in the store at the time of the shooting.
Click to expand...

One thing that really needs to be discussed is the concept of "first do no harm"; that if during an attempt to stop an active shooter you injure others you are simply adding to the damage.

In the example of the man throwing cans at least one person was close enough to the shooter to do something. But that is a limited area so the issue is not how many armed people were in the store but rather how many armed people were close enough to have actually taken a shot without hitting other folk. What is a reasonable radius where taking a shot against an active shooter has a very high probability for success? Five yards, two yards, ten yards? Then add in the total confusion and panic in the immediate area and ask if that makes the response radius even smaller?
 
Last edited:
Trunk Monkey said:
I'm not sure how that applies. Whether or not they were able to carry a handgun they weren't. How do they count any differently then the people who couldn't carry handgun?
Click to expand...

It attests to the fact that the vast majority of people who could be armed at these events aren't going to be armed. CCWs aren't going to save the world because too many don't bother carrying.

With that said, there could have been a bunch of people carrying at Walmart illegally. Nobody knows anything except that NONE OF THEM ENGAGED THE SHOOTER.

Trunk Monkey said:
My understanding is they're both right in the same place. There wasn't a Walmart there when my wife lived there but based on her understanding of that area the Walmart was on the grounds of the mall or immediately adjacent to it.
Click to expand...

Same place and "adjacent to it" are to different things. Walmart owns its property and has its rules and Simon _____ properties owns Cielo Vista Mall, a completely different property with completely different rules. Bottom line, the shooting did not occur at the mall and had nothing to do with the mall. Walmart is not at the mall.
 
bltmonty said:
Having lived in the El Paso area for nearly two decades and worked on both sides of the border, I would guess that that particular Wal-mart has the lowest percentage of concealed carry holders in the El Paso region. It is the closest Walmart to the U.S.-Mexico ports of entry; not surprisingly, the press estimated that 1000 of the 3000 shoppers were Mexican nationals, who cannot bring guns across the border. And many of the other shoppers were likely recent immigrants and undocumented Mexicans, both of whom have limited rights to guns and the knowledge and desire to use and carry them. If I were looking for the easiest target in El Paso, I would not choose the Walmart close to Fort Bliss, the east side or west side. I would choose that Wal-mart (makes me sick thinking this way).
Click to expand...

JohnKSa said:
Ok, I went the other way since I was trying to be very conservative, and estimated that only 1000 people in the store were NOT Mexican nationals. I also used the overall statistics for the state, not the figures for El Paso County.

So let's use the press estimate and the permit holder numbers/population for the county in which El Paso is located to try to get a rough feel for how many permit holders were likely on hand.

~850,000 persons living in El Paso County in 2018
~19,350 permit holders in El Paso County in 2018 (Based on the percentage of permits issued in El Paso County in 2018 (1.42%) vs. the total # of active permits in 2018)

That indicates that ~1 person in 44 are permit holders in El Paso County, compared to ~ 1 person in 28 or 29 for the entire state.

~2000 TX citizens present in the WalMart at the time of the shooting based on the press estimate.

One could therefore expect that there would be in the neighborhood of 44 permit holders present in the store at the time of the shooting.

My original estimate, based on the overall permit figures for TX and assuming only 1000 TX citizens in the store, was that it was likely that there were about 34 permit holders present.

If we want to be very conservative, we could assume that the estimate has a relatively large error and cut the numbers in half just to be really sure that we're not overestimating the number of permit holders present. If we do that, we still arrive at an estimate of 20+ permit holders in the store.

I think it's quite safe to assume that there were 15+ permit holders present in the store at the time of the shooting.
Click to expand...

There's a BIG difference between a permit holder and someone actually carrying a firearm. Being that at most only 10-15% of permit holders carry all the time that brings the number down to 2-3 people carrying firearms in the store.

If you read the first quoted post you'll see that's there's NO way there were 2000 eligible persons in the store. The actual number of people eligible to actually have a permit would have been under 1000.

~1000 Mexican nationals
~1000 recent immigrants or illegals
~ 500 children, it was a Saturday after all

That brings us down to around 500 people who MIGHT have a permit. Since there are ~1-44 that hold permits in that county that brings us down to 11 people who MIGHT have a permit.

All told there MIGHT have been 1-3 citizens in the store that were actually carrying. We know of one person who had a permit that wasn't carrying, we know of one LEO who wasn't carrying. That could well have been it.

Since the majority of people that might have been carrying aren't going to run to the gunfire the entire discussion is moot.
 
Double Naught Spy said:
It attests to the fact that the vast majority of people who could be armed at these events aren't going to be armed. CCWs aren't going to save the world because too many don't bother carrying.
Click to expand...

I've never disputed that. I'm not even sure I ever gave a damn.

Double Naught Spy said:
With that said, there COULD have been a bunch of people carrying at Walmart illegally. Nobody knows anything except that NONE OF THEM ENGAGED THE SHOOTER.
Click to expand...

I don't see how that's relevant to what I said at all.

Double Naught Spy said:
Same place and "adjacent to it" are to different things. Walmart owns its property and has its rules and Simon _____ properties owns Cielo Vista Mall, a completely different property with completely different rules. Bottom line, the shooting did not occur at the mall and had nothing to do with the mall. Walmart is not at the mall.
Click to expand...

And? I don't care if that Walmart was in Omaha. I wouldn't have been at either store on any Saturday because I don't do crowds.
 
Actually, all the talk about running to the sound of the guns is meaningless.
Many people who are “trained” ( military et al ) do not engage in a battlefield. For one reason or another they do not fire directly at the enemy. A person who advances under fire does so because it’s in them to act, and they have the training (and wherewithal) to know how to do so. They generally think about what happened afterwards, not beforehand. Training is not a guarantor of action... case in point the deputy at Parkland....he even directed others to stage outside and not advance. Granted he was armed with a handgun going up against a long arm but he had an advantage the kids in the building did not have ... he had body armor.... he was trained....he was supposed to engage...but......it was not in him to act. I carry to protect me and mine, however, until I am put in a situation like that I do not know with any certitude exactly how I will react. I know how Uncle Sam (USMC 0311 mos) trained me. I still say in that situation, other than getting my family out of harms way I do not know before hand what I would do. If, to protect my family, I had to take the shot I know I would take it. Protecting my family and getting them out of harms way is my priority. Anything else is secondary.
 
One thing that really needs to be discussed is the concept of "first do no harm"; that if during an attempt to stop an active shooter you injure others you are simply adding to the damage.
Click to expand...
Sure. That makes perfect sense. Shooting without a target, or without some kind of discipline is not like to make the situation better and could make it a lot worse. Again, I'm not telling people what to do or saying what permit holders need to do in the situations, just pointing out how the facts of this situation have changed the claims I will make about permit holders and mass shootings in the future.
There's a BIG difference between a permit holder and someone actually carrying a firearm. Being that at most only 10-15% of permit holders carry all the time that brings the number down to 2-3 people carrying firearms in the store.
Click to expand...
I agree with what you're saying 100%. In fact, that's my point exactly. It's not honest for us to claim that permit holders are likely to make a difference in mass shootings when so few of them carry. That's why I won't be making that claim any longer.

They COULD make a difference--it's just not likely given how few permit holders actually carry and the fact that based on what permit holders state here--many of those who do are reticent (and for good reason) to intervene if they can escape instead.
~1000 Mexican nationals
~1000 recent immigrants or illegals
Click to expand...
If you look at the first numbers I ran, they used exactly the estimate that 2000 of the 3000 present were unlikely to be TX citizens but used the permit holder figures for the entire state rather than specifically for El Paso County. So I think that's a reasonable number.
~ 500 children, it was a Saturday after all
Click to expand...
I used population figures for my calculations--those numbers include children. It is true that children can't get permits, but if one considers that out of the ENTIRE population of El Paso County (including children) 1 out of 44 persons are permit holders then you don't have to exclude children from your estimate because that factor is already incorporated into the estimate.
That brings us down to around 500 people who MIGHT have a permit. Since there are ~1-44 that hold permits in that county that brings us down to 11 people who MIGHT have a permit.
Click to expand...
Because the estimate is based on the distribution of permit holders across the entire population of El Paso County (including children) the entire remaining 1000 persons would be used in conjunction with the 1:44 number. If one wishes to exclude children, they should be excluded BOTH from the population figures (which would raise the likelihood of permits in the remaining population) and also excluded from the number of TX citizens in the store (which would decrease the number of persons on the population in question). But assuming the distribution of children in the "population" of the store is similar to the distribution of children in the population of the county, it would be a wash.

Using 1000 as the estimated number of TX citizens in the store (yes, including children) and 1:44 as the permit holder distribution amongst the population of El Paso County (also including children) indicates that it is very likely (better than 99% confidence level) that there were 23 (plus or minus 2) permit holders in the store.

As you point out, however, most permit holders do not carry and of the ones that do, some (perhaps many) have decided in advance not to intervene unless they have no other choice.

All of that is why I can no longer, in good conscience, continue to assert that permit holders are likely to be a factor in mass shootings.
 
as the o.p., i may have found a possible answer to my initial question about changing my ccw after el paso: s&w shield ez 380acp. i rented one today, along with several other 380 acp pistols: glock 42, sccy cpx3, taurus spectrum and s&w bodyguard. i liked the ez the most by far. the ez is about same size as the ruger sr22. centerfire. truly matches the publicity about being easy (i.e. soft recoil, easy to load mags, easy to rack slide). comfortable in my hands. i also brought along to the range for comparison a favorite taurus 85 2” 38sp steel snubbie. the ez was easier to shoot and faster to reload than the 85, but i was more accurate shooting the 85, likely because i’m way more used to it. does anyone use an ez for ccw?
 
The anti-gun cultist approach to mass shootings:
  1. It's better to kneel down and be shot in the back of the head execution style than to RISK somebody being shot in a "friendly fire" incident.
  2. It's morally superior to LET oneself be shot rather than to shoot back.
  3. The police SIMULTANEOUSLY:
    • Have a legal duty to protect you as an individual.
    • Are violent, racist sociopaths.
    • Should be the only ones with guns.
 
shafter said:
And out of the ones who might actually be carrying, how many are carrying the smallest pistol they can get their hands on because "the gun you have on you is better than the one you left at home?"
Click to expand...

Most of the time I carry a LW Commander. When I don't carry that I carry a Sig P365.
 
The only changes I have made was instead of practicing from 10-25yds, I increased to 10-40yds. I also have been consulting instructors who have dealt with defeating assailants with body armor to learn as much as I can about the armors weak spots.
 
The El Paso, Texas and Dayton, OH incidents should serve as wake-up calls to those of us who have been less than diligent about training, and who may not have been bothering to carry. This will apply to many of us.

.22 LR? Please, no, not even in large magazines. Yes, .22 LR can cause fatalities, but I would want every round I fire to be reasonably capable of maintaining its course while smashing through intervening obstacles, and while smashing/penetrating an opponent’s bones. Even the .380 ACP has been known to break femurs. (I am not sure how reliably the .380 will smash bones, but it has happened.)

I retired from a big-city PD in early 2018, and have been gravitating toward reverting to mostly carrying revolvers, with increased travel in ammo-capacity-restrictive states being a factor. The El Paso and Dayton shooters were not supermen; I would have been as happy with a GP100, Speed Six, or K-Frame, as any other handgun, if caught-up in either event. I would rather have six rounds of .38 Special or .357 Mag, inside the weapon, than ten rounds of .22 LR. The best “reload” is, of course, a second revolver.

For those who may pay attention to such things, I have not totally given up on carrying 1911 pistols, but it takes two good hands to really run a tightly-fitted 1911 at its best, I have never cared much for ambidextrous safety levers, and my aging right hand has not been at its best, lately.
 
To the OP actually yes. I want a little longer sight radius for a possible longer shot. I don't carry anything less than a 4" barrel, no snub nose. I practice at 10-20 feet for the most part, but am also concerned with the possibility of making a 50 or 75 foot shot, maybe 100 - and have started practicing that shot as something new. If the shooter has a good rifle, you are so outmatched it isn't funny. Look at the Miami-Dade shootout, like it outclasses handguns in power and accuracy so much it is not funny at all. Maybe you are lucky and are standing right next to the door the guy enters through - lucky is used loosely there, since that is also an unlucky spot, but if he doesn't target you first, it is possible you might be able to stop an attacker with a good shot.

I've thought about that scenario, say you see a guy with a rifle wearing eye and ear protection in a parking lot - how do you know it isn't a sick joke? High school kids around here recently were hiding outside their friends houses at night and then jumping out and scaring the other families. This seemed like a really bad idea to me, but they were doing it. Then there is the very real possibility that the guy standing near you - also has a gun, and thinks you're the shooter. You dray and start firing, and the confused person near you - draws and starts firing at you. It is just a horrible situation all the way around with no good answer … run away! run away!
 
Jeb Stuart said:
Really, yet the man that was shot and did the interview talks about how he was near the gunman and started throwing cans at him. Then when the shooter took notice, he shot him. A 380 at that range from someone trained with a pocket gun very well could have taken him down. People always under estimate the Pocket gun.

What would I have done? Most likely, ducked down, draw my weapon and try and figure out what the hell was going on, where the shots were coming from and move away from the shooter and toward a exit. But who really knows. The man throwing cans talked about how little children were being shot. That would certainly cause a intense anger in me. Where that anger would take me, I do not know.

El Paso victim throws cans. Man of courage.

Click to expand...


Should have know this was BS.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/el-paso-...-secret-service-white-house-trump-chris-grant
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
CCW - Action Type and reason(s) for the preference?
2 3 4 5
Replies
100
Views
6K
Wanderling
Wanderling
N
  • Locked
Your favorite small handgun for CCW?
2 3
Replies
54
Views
3K
Kind of Blued
K
C
  • Locked
CCW Gun Choice
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Cactus Jack Arizona
C
M
  • Locked
Tips for CCW in an office?
Replies
15
Views
1K
CDW4ME
CDW4ME
Ralph III
  • Locked
1911 style pistol for CCW?
2 3 4 5
Replies
119
Views
5K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
Back
Top