Discuss can some one tell me why? at the Non Wrestling Talk within the Wrestling Talk Forums; Why would you rely on the shooter not killing you? Why wouldn't you want to ...
Why would you rely on the shooter not killing you? Why wouldn't you want to save or try to safe yourself or some one else. I'm not saying take foolish risks. But hidding under a desk and closing your eye's and hoping he goes away is something we do as kids. Maybe cause most of us older guys had to go in he service had something to with the way I feel. I certinely brought my kids up different from the way I was raised. I would run to, but if you caught in a room with no where to go I'd rather fight than be executed.
But hidding under a desk and closing your eye's and hoping he goes away is something we do as kids.
Assumes facts and motives that are not established.
It very easy to say just jump the guy, but you have no evidence that no one actuually tried to do just that.
Also, Cho entered the classroom doorway. generally there is some distance between the doorway and the classroom seating. Given the amount of space, 6-10 feet, the time it would to "jump" Cho would likely be far too great to have any chance of getting him before a bullet pierced your chest. I'm fairly certain we were not dealing with a bunch of whimpies here and if the situation presented a reasonable opportunity for a hand to hand confrontation, some would have taken that risk.
fred, you assume much...
have you ever stared down the muzzle of a gun? it is a very difficult thing to do...
these kids also didn't know if this was the only shooter...i would think if someone HAD charged the shooter as you said you would have done that it would have been out of complete instinct, not premeditated thought...none of us know what we would do in that situation...if its someone in my house with my family, thats different, its instinct to jump in front of a bullet...in a classroom full of your peers, it is every person for themselves...
evidently Cho was NOT a very good shot but it only takes one bullet to slow someone down, doesn't matter where he puts it...its a god damn shame what this kid did but does anyone really think that even if Cho hadn't done it here that he wouldn't have done it when he got done with college somewhere down the line...
this kid was a time bomb and an enigma as he rarely spoke...i am sure there were warning signs but most everyone said he kept to himself so there weren't very many verbal cues that he was capable of something of this magnitude...
i am still just sickened about this and keep thinking back to my college days...any classroom that we would have been in would have been a shooting gallery...usually one exit and limited windows...most classrooms on the first floor i don't remember having windows or they were just slits...
i have to put a little bit of blame on the university as they had enough on this kid to most likely expel him and also on his parents as they had to know that their child was deeply troubled...
"Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until they speak."
To answer your question yes I have. And I think your right it would have to be insinct.
I'll add this. I'm not calling anyone whimps or cowards. I think it's just a generational thing. Societies change and evolve all the time.
Actually, I wondered the same thing. There was an interview with one survivor on the radio. He talked about how everyone was lying on the floor while Cho walked around the room, stood over each victim, and deliberately shot them. The survivor was grazed in the head by a round that then passed through his arm.
It seemed strange to me that in a room with 15 or 20 people, that they all remained passively while he progressed around the room.
I wonder if there are not a couple of factors at work. First of all, acts of individual bravery that I witnessed were usually motivated by a need to protect/defend comrades. The sense of brotherhood was strong enough to overcome the instinct for self-preservation. I doubt that the students in the classroom had gone through enough traumatic experiences together to develop that kind of bonding.
Secondly, (and, I suppose, obviously) would be training and/or experience. It is not instinctive to charge an ambush, but it is the best tactic. The first couple of times I was unpleasantly surprised, I went to ground. It seemed like the natural thing to do. Of course, a well designed ambush is planned for that and leaves you in the beaten zone when you go to ground or may have booby-traps in the available cover. Luckily, my comrades knew what to do and went straight into the ambush, breaking it up and saving my sorry @ss. I eventually learned to do the same.
In the VT attacks, had the members of the class returned the attack many might well have been shot - but they were SURE to be shot if they lie passive. By attacking, even with such mundane items as chairs, water bottles, books, etc. some might have escaped.
Of course, this is second guessing, and easy to do from my computer terminal. But I do wonder what would have happened with a 1/2 dozen combat vets in the room.
I agree with you totally, Fred. When faced with a situation such as that in Blacksburg, than individual has two options: do something or don't do something. When choosing to do something, he can decide to stop the shooter or exit the situation. When choosing to do nothing, he can lie there and hope not to get hurt. I think that many students lied hioping not to get hurt. In earlier times, the thought may have more toward the proactive. One of the most liberal folks I know, one of my professors, and one of the most conservative folks I know, a former boss of mine, both agreed that things aren't like they were in the old days and that these kids are raised to be more passive than kids were decades ago. These guys are both nearly 60 years old and have different political views, but commented the same. I think there is value in their statements.
Mike R: all you say may be true but, yes, you are second guessing a situation you weren't in, and the guys in the room aren't combat vets, and that doesn't make any of them any less of a man.
Nobody landed on this page from a search engine, yet!