Private citizens more effective than police in mass shootings.

[Double Naught Spy]

Well, if you truly believe that the data isn't correct, and the conclusion isn't correct (or at the bare minimum, logical), fine. I disagree.

If someone starts shooting around you, grab your socks and call the cops. Good luck.

You still don't get it. I have showed several examples where the data are bogus and hence the study is garbage. You can't draw the conclusions Barker drew from the data he used. I have never suggested about not responding to an incident or just to wait on the cops. In fact as stated above, I am a huge proponent of people taking action, even if they aren't armed.

Take the time and actually read the accounts in detail. Note how many people do get killed in mass shootings when the fight back and how many get wounded. Even when you use a gun there are risks involved. Engaging a person out to kill folks is very dangerous. When people don't respond, then the shooter is often allowed to continue his deeds until he gets tired, runs out of ammo, has weaponry that fails, runs out of targets, or until the police arrive.

No, you ad hominem attack is a logic flaw just as misguided Barker's data you state are correct. You can disagree, but it does not change the fact that he misrepresented the information and got information wrong.

But at the time of the shooting, they were private citizens defending their classmates, and not off duty cops responding to a call.

That is exactly what they were, off duty cops responding to a call, just not from a dispatcher. But let's get it straight. The two off duty cops were late comers anyway. The shooter was no longer shooting and was disarmed. He had already been tackled and taken to the ground by an unarmed student. That they showed up with guns was inconsequential.

According to Bridges, at the first sound of gunfire, fellow students Tracy Bridges and Mikael Gross, unbeknownst to each other, ran to their vehicles to fetch their personally-owned firearms. Gross, a police officer with the Grifton Police Department in his home state of North Carolina, retrieved a 9 mm pistol and body armor. Bridges, a county sheriff's deputy from Asheville, N.C., pulled his .357 Magnum pistol from beneath the driver's seat of his Chevy Tahoe. As Bridges later told the Richmond Times Dispatch, he was prepared to shoot to kill. Bridges and Gross approached Odighizuwa from different angles, with Bridges yelling at Odighizuwa to drop his gun. Odighizuwa then dropped his firearm and was subdued by several other unarmed students, including Ted Besen and Todd Ross.

According to Besen, before Odighizuwa saw Bridges and Gross with their weapons, Odighizuwa set down his gun and raised his arms like he was mocking people. Besen then charged, got into a scuffle with Odighizuwa, and knocked him to the ground. Bridges and Gross then arrived with their guns once Odighizuwa was tackled.

http://murderpedia.org/male.O/o/odighizuwa-peter.htm

Do y'all actually read the events????

 

[geekWithA.45]

Remember: "first responders, and the first line of defense are the people who are ALREADY THERE."

 

[Frank Ettin]

I think the point DNS is making is that from the relatively short list of events it's impossible to draw sweeping, general conclusions. Each event was complex and unique. The outcome of each event was the result of a confluence of factors. The statistical analysis was too superficial to be useful.

A statistical analysis of complex events tends to yield useful information only when the sample size is sufficiently huge to wash out the affects of idiosyncratic characteristics of each event or when the particular information sought is independent of those idiosyncratic characteristics.

 

[X-Rap]

Do you really think that it is possible to come up with such an agreeable study? It is much like trying to find the best ammunition based on police shooting vs concealed weapons holders, vs home owners, vs the same criteria in South America.
It's a dog chasing its tail, the study does take into account numerous factors and eliminates them from the pool but obviously not enough, I just have doubts to any study that will stand up to someone who strongly opposes its premise.