Las Vegas shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.

mworsham

Member
Joined
May 30, 2014
Messages
4
Location
TX
I'm listening to the Las Vegas PD briefing. The suspects, Mr and Mrs Miller, walked to the Wal Mart after ambushing and killing the two police officers at Cicis. Mr Miller entered Wal Mart and fired a shot and began shouting while his wife stayed a little behind and started loading their backpacks into a shopping cart.

The CCW holder was in the checkout area at Wal Mart and told his friend that he was going to confront the suspect (Mr Miller).

The CCW holder did not know that Mrs Miller was with the suspect, and walked right by her. When she saw the CCW holder going to confront her husband, she pulled a handgun and shot the CCW holder in the side/back. CCW holder never saw it coming and never got a shot off.

A tragic incident that we need to learn from. As I tried to imagine what happened yesterday and last night, it never occured to me that the husband and wife suspects had separated upon entering Wal Mart and that therfore the CCW holder did not know that they were together or that there were two suspects instead of one.
 
Last edited:
An argument for concealed carrier types to get some serious training. Being 'shot' by the second shooter gets your attention. Been there.

Also, the idea of confront is interesting. What does that mean? Start chatting with some who is actively shooting. Not a plan. This isn't TV.

That's happened before when a CCW type started chatting and got shot.
 

Interesting how some will create sinister headlines *linking* murderers to a group they dont like, then bury the relevant facts like this one, in the last paragraph:


"The Millers went to Bundy’s ranch, about 80 miles outside of Las Vegas, in April, they said on social media sites. But the militiamen shunned the couple because Jerad Miller had prior felony convictions in Washington State. Jerad Miller’s last note, posted on a social media site about seven hours before the shooting"
 
Again, this shows how a CCW getting involved in a 3rd person event ends badly. The man died w/o altering the outcome. He had no knowledge of the 2nd armed criminal and it cost him his life.
 
Sorry - VCA is NTI-speak for 'violent criminal actor.'

NTI = National Tactical Invitational, http://www.teddytactical.com/

==========================

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/c...s-man-killed-while-trying-stop-shooting-spree

Posted June 9, 2014 - 8:25am Updated June 9, 2014 - 11:53pm
Family mourns man killed while trying to stop shooting spree

=====snip=====
Debra Wilcox said her son in recent months had stopped carrying his handgun with him. “Only 10 out of 100 times he would take it with him. I don’t know why he took it with him yesterday,” she said.

His plan, when he returned from Wal-Mart, was to take his younger cousin swimming at a family member’s home.

But he never came back.

“He was very protective of other people. The reason he got that gun was because he got tired of people like that,” people who would pick on others, Debra Wilcox said.

Joseph Wilcox’s uncle John Wilson, during a phone interview, described his nephew as someone who wasn’t political. “But he definitely believed in the right to bear arms and the right to defend yourself and others,” Wilson said.

Wilson choked back tears and emotion — “It comes and goes,” he said — while speaking about his nephew.

“He basically… he heard the threat to everyone and he was trying to stop it,” Wilson said. “He wasn’t trying to be a hero. He was trying to do what he thought should be done. “

Wilson paused, reflected on his nephews actions, and admitted through tears, “I’d rather have him here alive.”
=====snip=====
 
We warn about 'tail gunners' here to the point some consider us paranoid. We promote ADEE to the point some consider us cowards.

There are reasons we do that...
 
I think we need to keep this in perspective. It's not that he acted, it's the methods in which he did act.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
 
I've said it before but an armed confrontation is so unpredictable (in outcome) that you should only engage when you have no other choice.... What happened to this well intentioned citizen is the stuff of nightmares. I'm almost twenty years out of police work now and this sort of stuff reminds me of the late seventies when we had another foolish president running our country.

My sympathies to the family of that young man (and to the families of the two officers that were also murdered).
 
I've been shot in the back, so to speak, by a tail gunner young lady at the NTI. Nice woman just standing there as I engaged the bad guy. Kind of stung so close up. Also, having a J frame and BGs attacking with full auto airsoft and shotguns - guess what you can be shot to pieces. Close up with a t-shirt, you pull the bloody thing off your back.
 
Last edited:
The nice woman said she shot me because in another run, she was the victim of an evil male friend who was going to shoot her. I vaulted a table and fled, looking for law. Thus, the payback in my back. :what:

Another time, she did save me from evil giant men. Life is complex.

You never know, once I thought I could disarm Skip's son in a rampage and the opinion was that I died trying. Once I disarmed Vicki and shot her.

Anyway, things like the NTI give a dose of reality to the FOG at play.

Oh, the row of bruises and scabs from the close in, full auto debacle did give me bragging rights at the gym. My whole squad died. Got yelled at by wife. Same when I busted the blood vessels in my hand in knife class. Brag to men, scolded by wife. Explaining the splint to politically correct faculty is interesting.
 
The Las Vegas shooting is a perfect example why you don't want to engage unless you HAVE TO. Always assume there are more attackers.
 
It has been years since I was in the class where the information was presented, maybe a decade, but I can't see where things have changed significantly.

Basically, the argument was that about 60% or more of the crime committed is committed by 2 or more individuals. That means that in the majority of cases, there is a second person or more. This manpower issue may not be as common with mass or spree killers, but does seem to be with anarchists and revolutionaries. Nobody really seems to start revolutions by themselves.

Of course at the time of the event, percentages and such don't mean all that much or the exact parameters behind what is going on. However, it is far better to assume that there are multiple threats than to assume that there are not.
 
I was taught and always operated on the street under two very similar guidelines.... The first one is that any weapon you've found and secured is only the FIRST one and that to assume otherwise is foolish....

The second tenet is that any shooter is just the FIRST one.... Yes, this kind of thinking and tactics can keep you up at night - but maybe, just maybe it will keep you alive in bad situations...

I can cite some really hair-raising personal stories about this sort of stuff -but we'd need an adult beverage or two to go along with them..... I've long believed that most training for armed citizens is just enough to get you killed on the street. I know that my own police academy and field training fit that same category (that was in 1974, 1975). Most of what I learned about staying alive on the street was actually learned the hard way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top