I've seen that.. also saw some comments afterwards that went a long ways towards showing that it was a skewed/unfair test.

I heard something about that too
but hadn't seen any links,* if you
come across them, plze post them..
I'm gonna to hit the rack for a bit

PT Rehab is beatin' the life outta' me



*Truth is, I reckoned it was just a lotta'
"Monday-Morning-Quarterbacking"

I don't have the links handy right now, but I believe two criticisms were:

-- For some reason the participants all wore loose, oversized t-shirts, which in at least one case made it more difficult to draw the weapon. If they had been wearing more common attire (shirts that fit, tucked-into pants, etc.) the results may have been different ...

-- While the test subject was kept unaware of the test, the "assailant" not only obviously knew about it, but also knew there was an "armed" person in the room and where they were sitting, and after hitting his primary target immediately started shooting at the test subject ...

Ah! Yes. Links:

Link 1

Link 2

Link 3

And many, many more in the Googleverse ...

---

Actually, it's a shame this experiment was so shoddily constructed -- a well-executed experiment might have yielded some interesting and relevant results. While the test subjects would have undoubtedly performed better, I have heard that unless you've actually been in a real shooting/being shot at situation, you're never really prepared regardless of how much training and practice you may have had. It would be interesting to see if that's actually true or not ...

[quote]I have heard that unless you've actually been in a real shooting/being shot at situation, you're never really prepared regardless of how much training and practice you may have had. It would be interesting to see if that's actually true or not ...[/quote

OK.. BE READY. I'M SENDING SOME MANIACAL BUDDIES OF MINE OVER... LOCK N LOAD.

By God, you're right! ...where would we all be without
The Right Wing's 'Talking Points Memos'?

__________________
3 links 1 message & all from "Goonz w/Gunz.org"

anyway... I fail to see how it's SO unplausible that
'the shooter' would have any difficulty picking out
the student desperately clawing at their weapon.

and of course they were dressed in protective gear,
they were firing paintball projectiles at each other.

As I said, I heard a report about 3000 Boston cops doing the search. I didn't check out the numbers the reporters mentioned. That being said, I assumed that these cops were pulled from their regular duties. I didn't check to see which cops they were. Using those numbers, I speculated that since those cops being pulled away would leave a shortage in those duties, that if I were a criminal, I would use that as an opportunity to do mischief. Again, I didn't check the actual numbers of crimes before, during, and after, that incident.

And the fear was exacerbated by the media and politicians

That's my opinion.

Dave

My problem with the new proposal was that this would affect private exchanges between friends and family, no matter what the amendments indicate.

Of course it's hard to distinguish exchanges between friends and thse back alley situations.

But the sales at gun shows are largely by licensed dealers.

Dave

What would be wrong with having regulations that affect those transactions between friends and family too?