WFAA gun discussions this week

[jb2012]

A few well placed shots to a plate carrier will most definitely subdue the shooter, it won't kill him but you can definitely stop the threat. Especially when we are talking about these puny cowards that are typically the ones being "the bad guy." Still pleasantly surprised about the whole video! Onviously I would change the other things y'all have mentioned. The Alert program at my school conducted the absolute most biased research project on the same topic and used the same type of bad guy (super tactical swat marine seal) except there was only one person in the room where the CHl'er was located and as soon as the door opened the "bad guy" just basically sprayed away.... Not even close to representable. Curious to see how the rest plays out.

[parabelum]

These so called "tests" are 100% rigged with a specific agenda that is often anti 2A. Classic example of experimenters cognitive and confirmation bias, a two for one if you will.


Now, if you would do an educational forum where public is informed of facts and stipulations pertaining to LTC holders such as non-felon, non-drunk driver, no history of domestic violence, not behind in child support payments and many many more, THAT would be a great start WFAA folks!

This stinks.

[cyphertext]

These so called "tests" are 100% rigged with a specific agenda that is often anti 2A. Classic example of experimenters cognitive and confirmation bias, a two for one if you will.


Now, if you would do an educational forum where public is informed of facts and stipulations pertaining to LTC holders such as non-felon, non-drunk driver, no history of domestic violence, not behind in child support payments and many many more, THAT would be a great start WFAA folks!

This stinks.

Somebody didn't watch the video...

[parabelum]

These so called "tests" are 100% rigged with a specific agenda that is often anti 2A. Classic example of experimenters cognitive and confirmation bias, a two for one if you will.


Now, if you would do an educational forum where public is informed of facts and stipulations pertaining to LTC holders such as non-felon, non-drunk driver, no history of domestic violence, not behind in child support payments and many many more, THAT would be a great start WFAA folks!

This stinks.

Somebody didn't watch the video...

You mean the "Ready. Aim. Truth: 'Good Guys' vs. 'Bad Guys'" where you have 4 CHL holders with 91 hours of combined training stacked against the "bad guy" who is tactical instructor, a SWAT member with 22 years of experience?

[Smokey]

There is some twitter discussion on it if you are into that newfangled stuff

https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/gunsintx?src=hash

[mojo84]

These so called "tests" are 100% rigged with a specific agenda that is often anti 2A. Classic example of experimenters cognitive and confirmation bias, a two for one if you will.


Now, if you would do an educational forum where public is informed of facts and stipulations pertaining to LTC holders such as non-felon, non-drunk driver, no history of domestic violence, not behind in child support payments and many many more, THAT would be a great start WFAA folks!

This stinks.

Did you watch the video? It appears you didn't or you watched the wrong one.

The only thing I may take issue with in this video is how quickly the bad guy noticed the openly carried gun. It seems the only agenda was to promote concealed over open carry.

[parabelum]

These so called "tests" are 100% rigged with a specific agenda that is often anti 2A. Classic example of experimenters cognitive and confirmation bias, a two for one if you will.


Now, if you would do an educational forum where public is informed of facts and stipulations pertaining to LTC holders such as non-felon, non-drunk driver, no history of domestic violence, not behind in child support payments and many many more, THAT would be a great start WFAA folks!

This stinks.

Did you watch the video? It appears you didn't or you watched the wrong one.

The only thing I may take issue with in this video is how quickly the bad guy noticed the openly carried gun. It seems the only agenda was to promote concealed over open carry.

I have responded already in a post above.


Anytime media chooses to do these good guy vs. bad guy scenarios in which they take ordinary permit holders as "good guys", and place a highly trained LE as a "bad guy", the jig is up in my book.
Timing of this story not withstanding, I've seen these good guy vs. bad guy hypothetical videos before.

Not a fan, my opinion.

[TexasJohnBoy]

Everyone is talking about how it was unfair that there was a tactically trained person playing the bad guy. I think that lends more to the situation -- they did pretty dang well considering. Imagine how much different it would be if it was an untrained nobody bad guy?

I do think there was a twinge of CC over OC in the piece, but overall I think it was well done and balanced. I hope part 2 is the same.

[mojo84]

These so called "tests" are 100% rigged with a specific agenda that is often anti 2A. Classic example of experimenters cognitive and confirmation bias, a two for one if you will.


Now, if you would do an educational forum where public is informed of facts and stipulations pertaining to LTC holders such as non-felon, non-drunk driver, no history of domestic violence, not behind in child support payments and many many more, THAT would be a great start WFAA folks!

This stinks.

Did you watch the video? It appears you didn't or you watched the wrong one.

The only thing I may take issue with in this video is how quickly the bad guy noticed the openly carried gun. It seems the only agenda was to promote concealed over open carry.

I have responded already in a post above.


Anytime media chooses to do these good guy vs. bad guy scenarios in which they take ordinary permit holders as "good guys", and place a highly trained LE as a "bad guy", the jig is up in my book.
Timing of this story not withstanding, I've seen these good guy vs. bad guy hypothetical videos before.

Not a fan, my opinion.

The inconsistency is that the good guys did a very good job against the highly trained bad guy. What is wrong with that?

[TexasJohnBoy]

The inconsistency is that the good guys did a very good job against the highly trained bad guy. What is wrong with that?

[cyphertext]

These so called "tests" are 100% rigged with a specific agenda that is often anti 2A. Classic example of experimenters cognitive and confirmation bias, a two for one if you will.


Now, if you would do an educational forum where public is informed of facts and stipulations pertaining to LTC holders such as non-felon, non-drunk driver, no history of domestic violence, not behind in child support payments and many many more, THAT would be a great start WFAA folks!

This stinks.

Did you watch the video? It appears you didn't or you watched the wrong one.

The only thing I may take issue with in this video is how quickly the bad guy noticed the openly carried gun. It seems the only agenda was to promote concealed over open carry.

I have responded already in a post above.


Anytime media chooses to do these good guy vs. bad guy scenarios in which they take ordinary permit holders as "good guys", and place a highly trained LE as a "bad guy", the jig is up in my book.
Timing of this story not withstanding, I've seen these good guy vs. bad guy hypothetical videos before.

Not a fan, my opinion.

So, again, did you actually watch the video, all the way through? The "good guy" won most of the time in this piece...

[rtschl]

The inconsistency is that the good guys did a very good job against the highly trained bad guy. What is wrong with that?

too.

[mojo84]

These so called "tests" are 100% rigged with a specific agenda that is often anti 2A. Classic example of experimenters cognitive and confirmation bias, a two for one if you will.


Now, if you would do an educational forum where public is informed of facts and stipulations pertaining to LTC holders such as non-felon, non-drunk driver, no history of domestic violence, not behind in child support payments and many many more, THAT would be a great start WFAA folks!

This stinks.

Did you watch the video? It appears you didn't or you watched the wrong one.

The only thing I may take issue with in this video is how quickly the bad guy noticed the openly carried gun. It seems the only agenda was to promote concealed over open carry.

I have responded already in a post above.


Anytime media chooses to do these good guy vs. bad guy scenarios in which they take ordinary permit holders as "good guys", and place a highly trained LE as a "bad guy", the jig is up in my book.
Timing of this story not withstanding, I've seen these good guy vs. bad guy hypothetical videos before.

Not a fan, my opinion.

So, again, did you actually watch the video, all the way through? The "good guy" won most of the time in this piece...

I thought the piece was 90-95% positive in favor of carry with one little bit promoting CC over OC. The lady did a good job but needs to improve her accuracy under stress. I bet she is a good shot when it comes to stationary paper targets.

[Pawpaw]

FWIW, it seemed to me the SWAT guy did a very good job of NOT using all of his skills.

For instance, he did not do a true tactical room entry. He basically just walked in and took charge just like I imagine most of these lunatics would, secure in their belief there would be no armed resistance. Even though he knew who our GG was, he proceeded as though he didn't... taking someone else down first. In one scenario, he even turned his back on our GG and bent over to deal with someone else... practically inviting the GG to shoot him in the behind.

Could it have been done better? Sure! Heck, there's always room for improvement. I still think this was an amazingly fair piece.

[Charles L. Cotton]

FWIW, it seemed to me the SWAT guy did a very good job of NOT using all of his skills.

For instance, he did not do a true tactical room entry. He basically just walked in and took charge just like I imagine most of these lunatics would, secure in their belief there would be no armed resistance. Even though he knew who our GG was, he proceeded as though he didn't... taking someone else down first. In one scenario, he even turned his back on our GG and bent over to deal with someone else... practically inviting the GG to shoot him in the behind.

Could it have been done better? Sure! Heck, there's always room for improvement. I still think this was an amazingly fair piece.

It would be impossible to have any simulation that truly replicated a live, unscripted, surprise event. About the only thing that could have been different would be to have everyone wearing protective headgear and having all of the good guys in the scene at the same time. One would have the gun, but the attacker wouldn't know who had it.

Yes, having a SWAT guy involved is far from realistic, but as Pawpaw said, it was clear that he didn't perform to his full capability. Instead, he tried to make it more realistic. I also thought he was very candid in evaluating the performance of the good guys and giving credit where it was due.

I also find the performance of the lady very instructive. The natural tendency is to shoot for COM, but in view of the increasing percentage of violent attackers using body armor, people need to train to put hits in the vital area identified by the SWAT officer.

This segment was as fair as I think it could be and totally unlike the sham of a set-up done by one of the networks a couple of years ago. Well done WFAA, keep it honest in future segments.

Chas.