Puzzled: How do you explain the results of the Garland TX shooting scenario??

[U8395279]

Info so far on the ISIS wannabe attack at the Mohammad Cartoon Context in Garland, TX yesterday is a bit perplexing to understand.

The two men who carried out the attack, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi, are said to have both been heavily armed with Assault Rifles, and wearing body armor. They tried to enter the parking lot of the venue for the event through a rear entrance, that was only guarded by two officers: a local school district security officer, and a Garland PD traffic officer. A total of 36 armed officers were guarding the event, and the entire Garland SWAT team and their police chief were on site.

So the terrorists tried entering the most weakly guarded back entrance of the heavily defended event. They managed to wound the school district security officer, who fell down after suffering a mild ankle wound. However, while they were shooting at him, it is being reported that the traffic cop then killed both men within a matter of a few seconds, just using his handgun. Apparently the range was quite close, and under 25 yards.

One would think that two men with semiauto rifles would have had the advantage in such a scenario. When I first heard about this incident, I assumed that they must have driven up close to the main entrance, where the Garland PD SWAT team would have all opened up on them. That would have certainly been a suicidal scenario for them.

But instead, the terrorist died at the most outer checkpoint, and were slain by a single Traffic Cop, using only his handgun. Should not the advantage in this gunfight have theoretically been in favor of the terrorists? And if so, why then did they fail so badly in this gun fight?

One would expect a SWAT team officer to be an excellent shot, but this Traffic officer must really be damn good with a pistol, to have done so very well in such a stressful gunfight. Especially since they were wearing body armor. Do you think that all credit should go to him? Or do you think that these wannabe ISIS fighters were themselves perhaps incompetent, and handled themselves poorly? After all, they just barely wounded the other officer.

It should be interesting to learn more about the specifics of this gunfight, as more details are made public. I wonder if Simpson and Soofi envisioned themselves being as successful as the two Charlie Hebdo gunmen, who managed to kill a policeman and so many defenseless people.

I guess that they ended up getting a lot more than they bargained for, by going up against the Garland Police Department. Garland was certainly not a repeat of Paris. In fact, it was just the opposite.

So how did we get such a good result in this shootout? Was it pure luck? An act of God? Or should we all simply praise this unnamed Traffic Officer as a hero?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/04/police-shooting-at-muhammad-cartoon-contest-in-texas/

.

Read More

 

[oknow]

Info so far on the ISIS wannabe attack at the Mohammad Cartoon Context in Garland, TX yesterday is a bit perplexing to understand.

The two men who carried out the attack, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi, are said to have both been heavily armed with Assault Rifles, and wearing body armor. They tried to enter the parking lot of the venue for the event through a rear entrance, that was only guarded by two officers: a local school district security officer, and a Garland PD traffic officer. A total of 36 armed officers were guarding the event, and the entire Garland SWAT team and their police chief were on site.

So the terrorists tried entering the most weakly guarded back entrance of the heavily defended event. They managed to wound the school district security officer, who fell down after suffering a mild ankle wound. However, while they were shooting at him, it is being reported that the traffic cop then killed both men within a matter of a few seconds, just using his handgun. Apparently the range was quite close, and under 25 yards.

One would think that two men with semiauto rifles would have had the advantage in such a scenario. When I first heard about this incident, I assumed that they must have driven up close to the main entrance, where the Garland PD SWAT team would have all opened up on them. That would have certainly been a suicidal scenario for them.

But instead, the terrorist died at the most outer checkpoint, and were slain by a single Traffic Cop, using only his handgun. Should not the advantage in this gunfight have theoretically been in favor of the terrorists? And if so, why then did they fail so badly in this gun fight?

One would expect a SWAT team officer to be an excellent shot, but this Traffic officer must really be damn good with a pistol, to have done so very well in such a stressful gunfight. Especially since they were wearing body armor. Do you think that all credit should go to him? Or do you think that these wannabe ISIS fighters were themselves perhaps incompetent, and handled themselves poorly? After all, they just barely wounded the other officer.

It should be interesting to learn more about the specifics of this gunfight, as more details are made public. I wonder if Simpson and Soofi envisioned themselves being as successful as the two Charlie Hebdo gunmen, who managed to kill a policeman and so many defenseless people.

I guess that they ended up getting a lot more than they bargained for, by going up against the Garland Police Department. Garland was certainly not a repeat of Paris. In fact, it was just the opposite.

So how did we get such a good result in this shootout? Was it pure luck? An act of God? Or should we all simply praise this unnamed Traffic Officer as a hero?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/04/police-shooting-at-muhammad-cartoon-contest-in-texas/

.

yes,yes and yes
all and all does it really matter because those two are getting their 72 virgin piglets because that is what they deserve.

 

[U8395279]

yes,yes and yes
all and all does it really matter because those two are getting their 72 virgin piglets because that is what they deserve.

Well, I suppose that this incident may show that training and skill are more important than the odds, or the weapons being used. For the Traffic officer was outnumbered, and going up against men who were bettered armed. Hopefully at some point in the future, a detailed account of the shooting will be made public.

The result is sort of ironic, too, in light of the fact that they were attacking in the name of God. Just an hour before the attack one of them tweeted:

"May Allah accept us as mujahideen."

Apparently God must have rejected them.

.

 

[JamesRL]

One possibility is that their "body armor" was the old PASGT vest issued from the 1980's to the late 1990's. It would - on a good day - stop a 9mm round, but nothing more and not always that. A lot of people in the "tacticool" world think that the PASGT vest is equal to the later "Interceptor" body armor system or the current modular system.

I've seen two people in the ER who made that mistake and had their friends shoot them to show how "bulletproof" the vest was (probably after saying "Hold my beer.").


Jim

 

[Outrider]

One would think that two men with semiauto rifles would have had the advantage in such a scenario.

In terms of equipment and initiative, they did have the advantage.

Should not the advantage in this gunfight have theoretically been in favor of the terrorists? And if so, why then did they fail so badly in this gun fight?

No plan survives contact. Differences in training and luck come into play. Mistakes are made and sometimes one side can take advantage of those mistakes. Instead of taking out the armed officer first, they shot the unarmed security guard and apparently stayed focused on him while the armed officer was able to get into the fight and shoot them. If they were better trained, they would have used distance to their advantage and shot the armed officer first (assuming they were aware of his presence before things began).

I wonder if Simpson and Soofi envisioned themselves being as successful as the two Charlie Hebdo gunmen, who managed to kill a policeman and so many defenseless people.

People have a lot of fantasies about how armed confrontations will go, how well they'll do, etc. Simple things can totally derail poorly trained individuals. Imagine the lead shooter having a jam in his rifle and not knowing how to clear it quickly or to transition to a secondary weapon.

There's a ton of talk about how to respond on the boards but what people often fail to take into account is that the confrontation is often not nearly as "neat" as what the person imagines it will be. Basic considerations can be overlooked and things can be botched.

It's sort of like that scene in Ronin where Sean Bean's character talks about setting up an ambush where the target is caught in a crossfire and the character hasn't thought it through that the shooters are downrange from each other. -Once we see the how the confrontation unfolded, the relative positions of the parties, and learn about the backgrounds (training) of the participants, the details will help explain the outcome.

 

[albin25]

What's that quote?... "Every plan is good until the first shot is fired"...
Or some such variation, that nobody can agree who said it, but is so true everyone wants credit for it?

 

[Certaindeaf]

Real life isn't a video game, as these two found out.
edit.. And revolvers still work.

 

[JamesRL]

Real life isn't a video game, as these two found out.
edit.. And revolvers still work.

I'm sure they're sitting in some antechamber of the lower reaches asking each other "What could have gone wrong? When we practiced it on the xbox, we won every time.".


Jim

 

[U8395279]

Ah, the story from the Garland Police is now changing. They are now saying that the one Traffic officer initially engaged them, but that he got quick backup from SWAT officers armed with AR15's, who also fired on the terrorists.

At this point it is uncertain who fired the lethal shots.

Here is a link to this update:

<broken link removed>

Here is a link to the earlier press conference from the Chief of Police:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/garland-shooting-hero-cop-credited-taking-gunmen/story?id=30789199

.

 

[elsie]

One thing to remember is that event was known to be controversial and likely to draw a response. I bet everybody there was running on high alert just waiting for/expecting somebody to pop out of the woodwork.


elsie

 

[Certaindeaf]

Running security is essentially a waiting game.

 

[Just Jim]

A good man with a handgun can be a fierce warrior, read up on Alvin York and his ability with a 1911.

 

[Buster1]

I read a report that the officer is 60 years old and has been on the force 38 years.

 

[Certaindeaf]

A good man with a handgun can be a fierce warrior, read up on Alvin York and his ability with a 1911.

And a pile of others. God bless Alvin though.

 

[alphapygmy]

I'm also wondering if what the progs are calling "body armor" was just LBE. Kinda like they know the difference between a barrel shroud and "a shoulder thing that goes up."

 

[rick benjamin]

A good man with a handgun can be a fierce warrior, read up on Alvin York and his ability with a 1911.

<broken link removed>

 

[Buster1]

Don't forget this Texas lawman. 104 yards, one handed with a pistol, while holding the reigns of two horses.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...shoots-suspect-104yds-holding-horses-handgun/

 

[Mark W.]

Heard today the event organizers paid 10K for the added police and security to be at the event.

So to goobers armed with weapons they most likely had little experience with Felons generally don't do a lot of target practice. Ran into 10K worth of highly trained experienced police and security. And it didn't end well for them. How's that not make perfect sense?

 

[albin25]

Did the perps actually use "assault weapons" or were they just black 10-22's.
Media usually say that out of reflex (and even some Cops) often dumb it down for the masses.

 

[Lange22250]

Having a rifle will give you no advantages if you don't know how to use it. If the first office was hit in the ankle I'd put a lot of money on these guys shooting from the hip and having no idea what they were doing.

Most body armor only covers 45% of the torso and has been noted above not all armor is equal.

Mind set is also important. The only explanation for most people who go down instantly with one or 2 hits is that's what they expected they should do based on TV/movie shootings, not because they were physically incapacitated.

Even the basic training most law enforcement gets and attempts to maintain will give a vast advantage to someone trained by watching movies and youtube hadji propaganda videos. "Gun Fighting" type shooting/training is not technically difficult, a lot more about big center of mass and rudimentary use of cover. The officer may have been a gun guy who took his training to the next level but based on the percentage of cops who do that it would be a bad bet.