CCW at the Damage Plan Concert

[Flyboy]

Wow. So close, yet so far. And to think, if not for a couple of stupid lines in the law, this could have been stopped a lot sooner.

http://www.ohioccw.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2603

-----Original Message-----
From: Roger
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 8:38 AM
Subject: columbus shooting helpless victims

My name is Roger [last name redacted]. My wife and I were at the Al Rosa Villa Dec. 8th for the concert that had several fatal shootings. We were standing right in front of the band member that was fatally shot when it all happened.

All I can say is that I felt SOOO helpless in there. We have been there 5-6 times in 3 years for various events, all of which without personal protection. We are both licenced to carry concealed. I leave my firearm at home for these types of events because of the law. The 'Villa serves alcohol, so no guns. I leave it at home instead of in the car because of the crime (I'd hate to lose my 1911 to a criminal).

Well, last night it all became clear to me. WOW! I stood not 5 feet from a man that was discharging his weapon into the band members head, shoulder and abdomen, then waving and shooting into the audience. I watched as he swapped clips, then I watched as he ran behind the stage where I heard several more rounds fired. I WATCHED!!!

Wow. I could not get far with the panic. I tried to drop to the floor, but my wife would not let me drop because of fear of being trampled. I also have a prosthetic leg. While I have [good] mobility I know when I need to wait for the crowd. So, as I stated a bit ago, I WATCHED!!!

I can not even begin to express the fear I have of crowds now. I felt so helpless to just have to ride it out and to have been lucky enough not to have been shot. I will think very hard before I go into the next victim zone! Feeling this way sucks!

Before last night I would only carry on few dates if I knew I could carry the whole time. Now I am installing my Fingerprint lock safe in our main vehicle so I can feel as safe as possible.

A police officer may have arrived quick and shot the suspect dead, but it was too late for many people!

Roger

 

[Sistema1927]

Two questions (trust me, this isn't a flame, they are honest questions):

1) Would you have had a clear shot without endangering innocent bystanders?

2) If you had shot the bad buy, what would you have done to ensure that the police officers who arrived on the scene didn't shoot you, mistaking you for the bad guy?

 

[bratch]

Bad deal all around. As a concert frequenter myself at local watering holes I can relate.

Flyboy: I replied to your a PM a while back

Sistema: Thats a post from another page. Flyboy is not the author.

 

[Sistema1927]

Sorry, I see that now. However, the questions are still valid, and maybe some will chime in:

1) What would be the chance of a clear shot without hitting an innocent bystander in that setting?

2) How would you keep from being plugged by the police upon their arrival?

 

[Grey54956]

Sistema,

I will take you up on the invitation to chime in.

From the author's description of events, he was very close to the shooting, so I suspect there couldn't have been more than one to four people directly infront of him if any. My guess is that there weren't any bystanders between him and the shooter, as the victim was directly in front of him.

Also, there is a good chance that the shooting took place on an elevated stage. Even small clubs and bars frequently have a small elevated stage, so I suspect that this was probably the case. This would give the author an even better chance of having a clear shot.

Also, if everyone is in panic mode, their instincts are generally to get away from a threat as quickly as possible, so if the author were to deploy a weapon, most people would also tend to move away from him as well. This could also contribute to a clear line of fire.

So, I would guess that the answer to your first question is that the chance of having a clean line of fire to the shooter was fairly good.

If the author were to neutralize the threat, the best thing to do would be to make certain that the situation is secure. Make certain the aggressor is neutralized. Secure and unload both weapons. Inform the club owner and security personel of your situation and intent, and contact the police to inform them of the situation. Then sit and wait.

Interestingly, your two questions are the typical of the arguments that are frequently used against us by the anti crowd.

 

[Gunpacker]

Police don't have a monopoly on good sense

An armed citizen is just as likely to be sufficiently aware of surroundings and do the deed as a police officer. In my experience, gun enthusiastic citizens fire more rounds and shoot in stress inducing competitions far more than police officers. Not all citizens are competent, but then most police officers are not really handy with firearms. Most are just interested in qualifying once or twice a year, and many can't do that without remedial training and several tries. There are far more competent and superior shooters in the general population than in the small group of highly trained police such as swat team members. In addition, there are always going to be civilians at a crime scene, but how many police do you usually find on scene at a crime?

 

[Carlos]

100% agreed on that point.

However. In Ohio, I shoot somebody else when I can't prove I'm in imminent threat of immediate bodily ....??? Hmmm...

After he shot Dimebag, and aimed at the crowd, that would have been my cue to call, if you will.

I shoot far more than any officer, and I don't claim to be an expert. My first thought after this shoot was "what if there was a CCW holder there?"

"What if everybody just carried all the time, no matter what..." (fantasy land).

It wouldn't have happened the way it did, that's what.

Our Ex-Marine Psychopath would have been dropped much sooner.

I do contratulate the officer on the good shoot.

 

[Gifted]

Carlos, isn't there something about others being in danger of bodily harm? If he's pointing it at someone else, that's good enough, I'd think.

 

[jefnvk]

Didn't something like this get CCW passed in Texas? maybe, some good will come out of it after all.

 

[Sindawe]

Came across this on Keepandbeararms.com tonight.

Eyewitnesses said Goodpaster got into an argument early Sunday with David Lightle around three pool tables, said Lt. Paul Ciesielski of the Indianapolis Police Department. The two beat each other with pool cues before Goodpaster pulled a semiautomatic handgun and fatally shot Lightle.

Once the shooting started at 12:50 a.m., another guest, Randy Howey, 30, Avon, pulled out his own pistol -- which he was licensed to carry -- and, police said, killed Goodpaster in self-defense.

When the shooting stopped, 14 rounds had been fired.

Source: http://www.indystar.com/articles/8/201825-6208-009.html

Perhaps a CCW holder could have made a difference...

 

[Carlos]

Gifted, I'm thinking in Oregon law. Do I have the right to take matters into my own hands, or should I flee? Hmmm??

Second a gun points in my general direction, well that's another story, Gifted.

 

[harvester of sorrow]

RANT:
Just like the so-called "Gun Free School Zone" Act allowed deranged children to kill at will, confident in the knowledge that their intended victims would be powerless to stop them, Ohio's prohibition against carrying firearms in establishments where alcohol is served now gives grudge-holding-lunatics similar protections in a new venue. It would seem obvious to me that the only people who are affected by such a law are: those who obey it, i.e., law-abiding citizens. The last time I checked, law-abiding citizens aren't the problem. In fact, I think you could assume that criminals (who are known to break the law from time to time) would ignore this provision pretty much as readily as they ignore the laws against murder, robbery, ingesting dangerous chemicals, etc. :banghead:

There will probably be a hue and cry in the media calling for stricter controls on the owning and carrying of weapons, but, as usual, they will be completely missing the lesson of this incident. Everyone in attendance that night was completely unarmed, in compliance with the law, EXCEPT for the dangerous crazy. If Ohio is worried about drunks with guns, they should pass a law prohibiting drinking and carrying, not one that makes victims out of sober and responsible people who want to go out and dance, or see a band perform, or meet with friends, or whatever else they might want to do in places that happen to serve alcohol. As others have observed, the best way to deal with incidents of this type is to stop them before they really get started.

End of Rant. Whew! Better now I know everyone here already knows this, I just needed to vent.

 

[DigMe]

Didn't something like this get CCW passed in Texas? maybe, some good will come out of it after all.

In Texas we still cannot carry into any establishment that makes 51% or more of it's revenue from alcohol sold for on-site consumption.

brad cook

 

[CAS700850]

Harvester,

I talked with a person on the draft committee who wrote the CCW legislation. The catalyst for the "no guns in bars" push was a combination of concern about drunk gunhandling, but also the concern about the number of fights in bars which occur, and the corresponding concern about introduing firearms into that situation. Not saying I agree, just saying how it happened. I can see the logic, to a certain degree. I have prosecuted far too many bar brawls, not always involving intoxication, to think that arming a bunch of people in bars is a good idea. (and yes, I know first hand that the law is not followed by everyone, which is why I know what a derringer looks like from eth barrel side.).

 

[harvester of sorrow]

CAS, interesting. I'm certain that the intent was well-meaning, I'm simply pointing out that bad people have always and will always be armed in situations and places where the law says they shouldn't be, and good people will always be the ones who suffer for it. Ohio's CCW law is fairly new, as I recall, but I would bet that guns were introduced into bar fights one way or another long before the state legislature allowed most people the opportunity to legally carry them, right? My feeling is that whatever number of firearms-related incidents in bars have taken place during the last 10-20 years will continue at the same rate for the next 10-20 years, and the same kinds of people will commit them for the same reasons. I also believe that people who go to the trouble of obtaining CCW permits aren't the type of people who commit these acts.

 

[sturmruger]

I would be curious to know what the penalty is for carrying in a bar?? Some states have very small fines for carrying in a location that is prohibited. If that is the case in OH I would disregard the law completly. If the punishment is more severe then I would probably just go in defenseless.

 

[io333]

Oh wow I can't believe I'm going to say this. Before I say it, I just want to point out that I am a card carrying member of the Libertarian party, and a CCW holder for 10 years now.


Here we go...


I don't really have a problem with no CCW in bars. I haven't "hung out" in a bar type bar for many many years now, but I used to.


I think the problem is that some places are bars, and some places are "bars."


I sometimes go to nicer places with an upscale crowd... not very upscale, just not the kind of places that has $.50 drafts in plastic cups. Places that don't have bouncers and serve good food or have fantastic views. Those places don't need CCW restrictions -- they are silly.


On the other hand, there are bar type bars. There ought to be another word for them. Do you know what I mean? The meat markets. The places with blaring music where you can't hear yourself scream, with *many* huge bouncers, and where the cops show up every night for the brawls over some slut. Those places need to have no weapons, no CCW, no lots of stuff. And metal detectors. And a jail next door. And signing a liability waiver before stepping inside.

But how can you distinguish between the two types of joints? There are plenty of grey area bars too. Whether or not alcohol is served is a simple dividing line, but a lousy one that really is trampling rights.

Maybe there ought to be "nice joints" and "bad joints" defined in some way. I don't know, I can see I'm just rambling now.

 

[MrKandiyohi]

Here in Minnesota, you are permitted to carry in a bar just as you can in public. The big difference is that your permit is no longer valid if you're intoxicated (.08 BAC). As long as you have your faculties, you can carry.

That would solve the problem of carry in bars. If you're in a situation where you need to defend yourself, then you have the ability to recognize that.

If you're going to drink, leave the pistol behind.

 

[Andrew Rothman]

I still don't understand gun rights advocates who think that some places ought to be off limits for carry.

The issue is fundamental: GUNS DON'T CAUSE CRIME, NOR DO THEY MAKE PEOPLE BEHAVE IRRESPONSIBLY!

In states that don't ban permit holders from carrying in bars, have there been a rash of bar fights turning into gunfights? Have there been any?

I know that 22,000+ Minnesota permit holders can carry into any bar they please. I do it all the time.

No shootings in bars yet!

People who get permits are overwhelmingly law-abiding, so the odds are good.

Regardless of the above, there is a principle at work here: We shouldn't legislate against possibilities -- we should legislate against ACTIONS.

 

[13013]

I'd rather be caught with my gun than without one. I carry it everywhere.