Armed Citizen Who Stopped Mass Shootings?

[BSA1]

University of Texas Clock Tower Shooting, 1966: Gunman Charles Whitman killed 14, injured 32.

 

[sniper5]

I don't know if this qualifies for the OP's criteria, but it was a theft and kidnapping at a gun range in Santa Clara that I was personally involved in. The perp's plan was to murder the three employees at the range and shoot up a nightclub. You have to read down a while till you get to the discussion of the specific event. QuarterBoreShooter was the shooter that stopped the perp. Here's the link:

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=46699

 

[MedWheeler]

SimplyChad asks:

And what about ft.hood and bliss?

What about them? I don't know about what incident at Bliss you're asking. At Hood, it was two civilian LEOs who brought down the shooter. Both were on duty, assigned under contract with the Army to provide LE services at the base, since a majority of the base's own MPs were deployed overseas. So, this doesn't count as an incident of civilian involvement for this thread.
Keep in mind (as I recently had to remind a colleague about "gun-free" zones) that soldiers on base here in the US are not armed. Except for the sidearms of MPs, their weapons are kept secured in the base armory. From what I recall, that was a Clinton-era decision included with one of his RIF policies. It's definitely a crying shame to picture many of America's finest warriors having to duck and cower like helpless animals because they were not permitted to be "at the ready."

 

[Neverwinter]

The recent Giffords shooting in Tucson.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

White House shooter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A few years back a wackadoodle stood in front of the White House and opened fire with an AK or SKS.

When he attempted to reload,a man [ possibly military or reservist ] tackled him and took him out .

Until the guard got there to take him into custody.

the brave soul was unarmed [ after it is Washington ] and stated he was trying to become an LEO.

That was Harry Rakosky who was a former security guard who used to guard embassies under construction. Others quickly arrived to help hold down the shooter until law enforcement arrived.
http://articles.latimes.com/1995-06-30/news/mn-18913_1_white-house

and the gun used apparently was a Chinese SKS.

SADLY,most active shooters take advantage of "gun free zones" and that precludes the possibility of most meeting a quick end to their carnage.

While they may benefit from it, there really doesn't seem to be a pattern indicating that the shooting locations were selected because they were gun free zones. Most commonly the locations are where the shooter had problems of some sort.

SimplyChad asks:

And what about ft.hood and bliss?

and Medwheeler responded:

What about them? I don't know about what incident at Bliss you're asking. At Hood, it was two civilian LEOs who brought down the shooter. Both were on duty, assigned under contract with the Army to provide LE services at the base, since a majority of the base's own MPs were deployed overseas. So, this doesn't count as an incident of civilian involvement for this thread.

Fort Bliss does not either. The 2010 shooting of 3 people by Craig Allen Graham killed one and wounded two. He too was arrested by responding police. The shooting wasn't actually on base, but at a club in central El Paso.
http://www.kvia.com/news/30224247/detail.html

Maybe you meant the case in 2010 when a gunman shot two at a convenience store on base before getting gunned down by police.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/09/20/shooting-fort-bliss-army-base/

Keep in mind (as I recently had to remind a colleague about "gun-free" zones) that soldiers on base here in the US are not armed. Except for the sidearms of MPs, their weapons are kept secured in the base armory. From what I recall, that was a Clinton-era decision included with one of his RIF policies.

Actually, soldiers being unarmed on base is nothing new and the practice goes back several decades. Clinton's influence was only in disallowing personal arms.

Not having guns and/or ammo was something of an issue on Dec 7, 1941 at Pearl Harbor. Of the few guns on land, most had little or no ammunition. Most shipboard guns had no ammunition available either. By and large, ammo was securely stored in gun lockers/depots and ship magazines.

Apparently the night before most of the troops were due to leave Iwo Jima, most of their ammo and some guns were boxed up to be taken to the pickup ship. So when the banzai attack happened this night lots of the soldiers didn't had guns or ammo.

When the USS Cole was attacked, none of the guards on duty had ammunition for their guns. Even if they would have had it, they were under orders not to fire the first shot. So the bomb boat would still have completed its mission.

In the 1983 Marine barracks bombing in Beirut, the truck bomber crashed though barbed wire fence and drove past 2 guard stations where the guards would not allowed to have loaded weapons. They were carrying mags and ammo, but by the time they got their guns up and running, it was too late.

It's definitely a crying shame to picture many of America's finest warriors having to duck and cower like helpless animals because they were not permitted to be "at the ready."

Maybe so, but this isn't because of anything Clinton did. It is our military that doesn't trust its own soldiers enough to be armed with their duty weapons while on base.

 

[Alaska444]

The most amazing self defense example I have ever heard about was the Indian soldier who took on 30 robbers with only his knife and WON.

http://xnepali.net/a-gurkha-soldier...-be-felicitated-in-the-republic-day-of-india/

 

[Double Naught Spy]

What a great story, A444. Gurkas have had a reputation for being brave fighters. It has nothing to do with mass shootings, so I not sure of the relevance of your post. Bijaya Shrestha was on a train that was robbed in 2010 by 30-40 bandits using bladed weapons and pistols, thought it is thought the pistols might have been fake because they never fired a shot. The looting of the train was all but completed when the bandits attempted to rape a girl and he acted.
http://archives.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=27100

 

[Alaska444]

All true DNS, but wow, what a brave man. My five shot Ruger SP101 would not have put down as many men as this man did with a knife that he brought to a gun fight!! I pray to never be in a similar situation.

 

[wacki]

That is a similar reason you rarely hear of robberies of gun shops when they are open.

And why post offices, gun-free schools and unarmed military bases (oxymoron at it's best) like fort Hood are prime targets....

 

[the_hustleman]

Interesting topic, I'll have to come back later

*swyped from the evo so excuse any typos*

 

[Cosmoline]

While they may benefit from it, there really doesn't seem to be a pattern indicating that the shooting locations were selected because they were gun free zones. Most commonly the locations are where the shooter had problems of some sort.

That's true from my knowledge and experience in these matters. But there is a strong correlation between the places typically targeted by spree killers (large employers and educational institutions) and enforced gun-free zones. And there's a legitimate question about the efficacy of these policies.

But even in gun-rich environments a deranged spree killer is danged difficult to deal with. He follows no ordinary rules, and may target people with no connection to him and no apparent motive. A madman ran roughshod through Anchorage a few years back. He just wandered into town after killing his dad and taking his handgun. He went where the voices in his head told him to go, and shot people sitting in their cars and on the trails before finally getting caught. How can you prepare for some nutter just up and shooting you in the back? It's not easy. You can just do what you can do.

 

[Neverwinter]

But even in gun-rich environments a deranged spree killer is danged difficult to deal with. He follows no ordinary rules, and may target people with no connection to him and no apparent motive. A madman ran roughshod through Anchorage a few years back. He just wandered into town after killing his dad and taking his handgun. He went where the voices in his head told him to go, and shot people sitting in their cars and on the trails before finally getting caught. How can you prepare for some nutter just up and shooting you in the back? It's not easy. You can just do what you can do.

In those kinds of incidents, it's the lack of perception regarding the entire series of events which makes the armed response harder than the archetypal self-defense situation such as a mugging. The Giffords shooting is one example. When the CCW holder entered the scene from across the street, his first identification of the shooter was an incorrect one. His contribution to stopping the shooter wasn't the armed response that was available to him, but physically subduing the shooter.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

The Giffords shooting is one example. When the CCW holder entered the scene from across the street, his first identification of the shooter was an incorrect one. His contribution to stopping the shooter wasn't the armed response that was available to him, but physically subduing the shooter.

I have found it interesting that there have been at least 3 of these attacks now where CCW people are in the area and make a point of talking with the media about how they have guns and are prepared to act, but in reality did absolutely nothing with their guns.

You have Dan McCowan at the Tacoma Mall who carried a gun to protect others and then didn't even have it drawn when he opted to verbally engage the shooter who then shot him multiple times.

Joe Zamudio at the Giffords shooting. Talked a lot about his gun and being prepared to use it and made a big deal about it with the media, but his gun and his being prepared to use it had nothing to do with the sitaution.

Ralph Swagler at the BBQ across the street from the IHOP shooting in Carson City, NV, told 911 and the media about having his gun but never did anything with it.

 

[Cosmoline]

Those are all good incidents to learn from. In the case of the Tacoma Mall shooting McCowan warned the killer first, which was a huge mistake obviously. In the Giffords shooting Zamundio arrived after it was over and correctly didn't shoot. Swagler had a mere handgun against a long gun and as I recall never had an opportunity to engage.

Part of the problem is inherent with mere handguns. Even in the best trained hands they're pretty limited. Part of the problem is in the irrational behavior of the spree killer. These guys don't respond as a mugger or ordinary criminal might. So a warning for example is a terrible idea. The only reliable way to safely stop them is to intentionally kill them with a shot to the back of the head, which runs against the grain of what most of us are taught. You have to treat them like monsters because that's essentially what they are. Lesser wounds may not even register in their minds. They're so wired up on pure crazy they don't even care if you're putting bullets in them. Many have come there to die, so they're hoping to be shot.

Thankfully these kinds of incidents remain far more rare than typical contact with typical criminals in muggings, home invasions and the like.