four volunteer “good guys” were placed into three different scenarios:
A workplace mass killing, where a fired employee came
to shoot up his office after being terminated. The “good guy” is armed
with a handgun as the “bad guy” enters the office and indiscriminately
opens fire with an AR-15 while wearing body armor.
A terrorist attack eerily similar to San Bernardino
terrorist forces his way into a packed conference room and begins
executing hostages with an AR-15 while wearing body armor.
A workplace domestic violence situation, where an
armed husband threatens his wife in her office with a gun.
Our sister site Bearing Arms has video of a fascinating experiment
conducted by a DFW television affiliate as to whether an armed citizen
stands a reasonable chance of materially affecting the outcome in an
active shooter situation. One of the tiresome canards of the left is
that citizens with concealed handguns would be of absolutely no value
in an actual active shooter situation versus someone with a rifle.
To put this theory to the test, the television station pitted four
ordinary gun owners with various levels of firearm training against a
22-year veteran SWAT cop with highly specialized training. The least
experienced shooter had only 6 hours of training, like you would get in
a standard CCP class. The most experienced had 50 hours of handgun
training from the DFW shooters academy.