TexasCHLforum.com

Pawpaw wrote:Relax mojo... That's not the reason we think negative of you.

I still feel the first two episodes were remarkably balanced. Much better than the similar attempt a while back where the BG made it a point to shoot the GG first, every time.

I suppose it was just too much to hope that an ABC affiliate would maintain that balanced approach.

FWIW, You can see all of the episodes here: http://www.wfaa.com/search/Ready.%20Aim.%20Truth/

fickman wrote:

Solaris wrote:"So why is Body Armor so easy to obtain?"

hahahaha

I laughed so hard I almost spit my iced tea when he said that. I knew there would be sensational angle somewhere - not sure if this is just a great tease or if he's really going after body armor tonight, but it struck me as funny nonetheless. Amidst a multi-part investigation into firearms which has not really called into question their necessity or the motives of those who carry them, body armor was a non-sequitor I didn't see coming.

If this is a calculated move for the antis (and I don't think it is), it is a major retreat to fight a battle outside of the theater where most of the skirmishes have occurred in recent history.

I do think the LEO actor is trying to create realistic scenarios that are useful in training for real students. The involvement of a shooting academy and its employees has made the conclusion of each scenario so far to lead us to "so what can we learn" and "how could we have done better" rather than "see, guns are bad". This is keeping the entire series on track in my opinion.

baldeagle wrote:Here's part 2. http://www.wfaa.com/videos/news/local/i ... /78724756/

Pawpaw wrote:

rentz wrote:One thing to note though that getting hit center mass wearing body armor is still going to be felt and slow someone depending on caliber. But I suppose for the simplicity of this demonstration it was easier to dismiss that which I can't argue too much with

I agree, if they're weairing soft body armor only. In that case, they will likely have a broken rib or three.

If they have AR500 steel backing plates behind soft armor though, that changes the dynamic. The impact of the round will be spread throughout the entire plate and not amount to much for most handgun rounds.

I've seen videos of our boys in the sandbox getting hit in the body armor/steel plate with an AK-47. That put them down, but they were immediately on their feet and scrambling for cover. The effect of rifles and handguns are not equal.

Lynyrd wrote:

Solaris wrote:Let's count the ways this was a ridiculous sham:

1) Use trained Tactical Officer as bad guy vs untrained CHL. More realistic would be an untrained person with mental issues.

2) Put CHL in 4th Cube or same chair in each scenario.More realistic would be to let him choose wear to be.

3) Make sure CHL is only one wearing gun, so it is easdy for bad guy to pick him out.More realistic would be everyone wears a helmet.

4) Allow bad guy to wear Vest, to further discount any hits CHL might make.More realistic would be no vest.

5) When open carry is used, make sure it is fully exposed as soon as someone walks in door.More realistic would be random seat and allow him to use body to block view from door.

I am actually shocked the CHLS did so well.

I had some similar thoughts. Most important was their choice of bad guy as a trained tactical officer. Of course this doesn't simulate real life either because the CHLers knew something was going to happen and had time to think about it. I don't think it was a fair test at all, but at least they didn't say anything negative about even having a CHL. I'm glad they did pretty good. In any case, if I owned that business I would want to have any of those good guys armed vs. unarmed.