Southside shooting of interest

[bobzilla]

Because

“We want to remind everybody that just because they have a weapon doesn’t mean they should use it,” said Cook.

Context

They said the same thing with Eli and the greenwood thing

 

[BehindBlueI's]

They actually have the video interview of the woman saying those exact things. So yes, they have that much information because it’s ON THAT SAME PAGE.

So you're complaining they aren't putting the story out but you got the story from them...ok.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

They said the same thing with Eli and the greenwood thing

Did they?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

This is one reason I and my wife avoid Indy like the plague, it has turned into a little chicago for sure. Is there any locations safe in Indy anymore????????????

Yeah. The vast majority of it the vast majority of the time.

 

[bobzilla]

Did they?

They pretty much say it at every self defense or defense of others. I get a chance tomorrow I’ll dig through the 4 billion page greenwood shooting thread and repost it

 

[BehindBlueI's]

They pretty much say it at every self defense or defense of others. I get a chance tomorrow I’ll dig through the 4 billion page greenwood shooting thread and repost it

Funny thing is I was at both scenes. I once again don't know who "they" are. Eli got nearly universal attaboys and, once again, it was a known good shoot before he left the scene to be interviewed. I'm sure you can find someone somewhere that said something different, but 5% of people will say whatever they think is against the prevalent thought pattern just to show how different they are.

I obviously can't talk about this one yet. A lot of times there is information that is not released so that witnesses can be vetted by knowing what only someone who was there should know. It's released info that he was released with no charges, though. Once everything is settled there's some lessons that others may find of interest, but I will say some folks in the thread have already picked up on potential issues.

 

[bobzilla]

Funny thing is I was at both scenes. I once again don't know who "they" are. Eli got nearly universal attaboys and, once again, it was a known good shoot before he left the scene to be interviewed. I'm sure you can find someone somewhere that said something different, but 5% of people will say whatever they think is against the prevalent thought pattern just to show how different they are.

I obviously can't talk about this one yet. A lot of times there is information that is not released so that witnesses can be vetted by knowing what only someone who was there should know. It's released info that he was released with no charges, though. Once everything is settled there's some lessons that others may find of interest, but I will say some folks in the thread have already picked up on potential issues.

And that’s fine once we know what is going on. Sone here love to jump on the band wagon as a butter before we even know what’s going on or happened. I’m definitely not taking a leap over a comment like that. From what I’ve seen/heard from the victim she is thankful for the person with a gun that assisted and the correct one is playing the room temp game

 

[BehindBlueI's]

And that’s fine once we know what is going on. Sone here love to jump on the band wagon as a butter before we even know what’s going on or happened. I’m definitely not taking a leap over a comment like that. From what I’ve seen/heard from the victim she is thankful for the person with a gun that assisted and the correct one is playing the room temp game

You can shake a guy's hand and tell him he did a good job but still acknowledge that some of the actions/decisions were suboptimal and have both the participant and others learn from it. This is not specific to this incident. I've learned a lot from other's mistakes and I learnt from my own, but one is much less painful. Particularly when the stakes are one of you is dead at the end.

 

[KellyinAvon]

You can shake a guy's hand and tell him he did a good job but still acknowledge that some of the actions/decisions were suboptimal and have both the participant and others learn from it. This is not specific to this incident. I've learned a lot from other's mistakes and I learnt from my own, but one is much less painful. Particularly when the stakes are one of you is dead at the end.

Wait, I thought it was "larnt", the past tense of "larnin"

Seems like we can take a lot from this one.

 

[Mij]

Once everything is settled there's some lessons that others may find of interest, but I will say some folks in the thread have already picked up on potential issues.

Purdy obvious but could just be me, been mistaken before

 

[Twangbanger]

Wait, I thought it was "larnt", the past tense of "larnin"

Seems like we can take a lot from this one.

Reprise of the FBI "kneeling / elbow on knee" shooting position in 5--4--3...

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Funny thing is I was at both scenes. I once again don't know who "they" are. Eli got nearly universal attaboys and, once again, it was a known good shoot before he left the scene to be interviewed. I'm sure you can find someone somewhere that said something different, but 5% of people will say whatever they think is against the prevalent thought pattern just to show how different they are.

I obviously can't talk about this one yet. A lot of times there is information that is not released so that witnesses can be vetted by knowing what only someone who was there should know. It's released info that he was released with no charges, though. Once everything is settled there's some lessons that others may find of interest, but I will say some folks in the thread have already picked up on potential issues.

You can shake a guy's hand and tell him he did a good job but still acknowledge that some of the actions/decisions were suboptimal and have both the participant and others learn from it. This is not specific to this incident. I've learned a lot from other's mistakes and I learnt from my own, but one is much less painful. Particularly when the stakes are one of you is dead at the end.

This exactly... I know it's the reason that I'm here on this thread and others, to learn from others' experiences... instead of having to learn in realtime when fractions of a second matter.

My biggest complaint about the news story was that in the text, they pretty much quoted or paraphrased everything from the interview with the victim, EXCEPT that the perp pulled out a gun and that she felt grateful that the shooter was there... that she felt he saved her and her children. JMO, but narrative on the part of the media... or they got the video up before they updated the text of the report... but still, all the other stuff from her interview. I'm skeptical.

When they initially showed her wounds, my first thought was she was fighting off the perp on top of her and her arms were in his chest, center of mass, and that's how she got wounded... just in the way of the target. However, when she described her wounds, particularly in her right arm, sounds more like pass-thoughs of some sort... at least the bullet still lodged in her right arm makes me think possibly FMJs passed through the perp or something else, not a direct hit which would likely be more damaging. Anyhow, not a "direct" hit with SD rounds that would, IMO, have liekly caused much more damage.

Anyhow, bottom-line take-away regardless, no such thing as being "too accurate". As @Twangbanger reinterated, train, train, train...

 

[Cameramonkey]

This exactly... I know it's the reason that I'm here on this thread and others, to learn from others' experiences... instead of having to learn in realtime when fractions of a second matter.

My biggest complaint about the news story was that in the text, they pretty much quoted or paraphrased everything from the interview with the victim, EXCEPT that the perp pulled out a gun and that she felt grateful that the shooter was there... that she felt he saved her and her children. JMO, but narrative on the part of the media... or they got the video up before they updated the text of the report... but still, all the other stuff from her interview. I'm skeptical.

When they initially showed her wounds, my first thought was she was fighting off the perp on top of her and her arms were in his chest, center of mass, and that's how she got wounded... just in the way of the target. However, when she described her wounds, particularly in her right arm, sounds more like pass-thoughs of some sort... at least the bullet still lodged in her right arm makes me think possibly FMJs passed through the perp or something else, not a direct hit which would likely be more damaging. Anyhow, not a "direct" hit with SD rounds that would, IMO, have caused much more damage.

Anyhow, bottom-line take-away regardless, no such thing as being "too accurate". As @Twangbanger reinteraed, train, train, train...

This is intentional. Text is searchable and shows up when you try to "google" for more info. Audio/video is not. This shows the media has an agenda and will omit key info in the written story that they dont want to be part of the archives of record.

In a couple weeks/months the video will get buried, never to be watched again. Why? Because the text doesnt have the juicy bits they didnt want us to read, which is the only part of the story that will show up in TEXT searches. (dont commit the inconvenient facts in the audio to text, and the inconvenient truth eventually wont appear in the surface level searches.)

 

[BehindBlueI's]

The media does whatever is sexiest and gets the most clicks. "Car in the river" is the headline when the picture shows it's not even up to mid-axle. I get where you guys are coming from, but it just doesn't add up from both reading about an event and being at the event. If they wanted to make more hay of bad gun uses, there's PLENTY of meat on that bone you never hear about. An expose on how many accidental shootings resulting in injury or death vs how many bad guys shot and how many bad guys are shot while both sides are engaged in criminal activity (drug dealers don't lose the right to self defense merely by being drug dealers...) More detailed accounts of the "normal" murders (most of them aren't sexy enough to get much air time, unless there is a racial component, a child, *sometimes* a domestic if it's a slow news day, or if there's a substantial gulf in socio-economic background.

Everybody except the participants will forget this occurred in a few months. Hell, *I'll* forget it occurred most likely because I've been to so many of them they all start to run together unless my memory is specifically routed to one for some reason.

I will add that sometimes they will hold on to something they know if we ask them to and they understand the investigative need. The majority of local reporters aren't part of some anti-gun conspiracy or narrative (but, again, some outlets are better or worse than others), and they often *think* they are doing the right thing for public safety even if they aren't because they are acting from ignorance. I'd be a terrible PIO as I can't empathize with them and their profit motive that much, but I don't hate them. Except the Indy Star. Any charge in this thread leveled at "the media" likely applies to them at least twice over.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Saw the update on Fox 59: the had a short clip of the victim. She thanked the armed bystander and emphasized having children in the SUV.

@BehindBlueI's : It seems like you were wanting us to have some take-aways with this incident. Anything we missed?

 

[BugI02]

Well then...I guess we just need to see an "uptick" in 3,4,5,6-person "Good Samaritan Crews" ganging up on carjackers and lighting them up with multiple guns at once ?

Sounds like "they" deprived the Prosecutor of somebody to turn loose. Woman is grateful. Cracked eggs, made an omelet...all good. If the Good Sam had pistol-whipped the guy on the head, the perp would probably be in a hospital, lawyered up and sucking societal resources right now, instead of (eventually) being converted into ashes by county employees.

If somebody is ever on top of me or one of my loved ones attacking them with a gun, I hope a good guy helps out. Marksmanship is of course appreciated...but when your number comes up, we cannot always be choosy.

Unless it's a cop who grazes me...in which case I'll petition to have qualified immunity suspended, sue his azz and the ass he rode in on, and deplore his marksmanship on INGO. Aholes.

Train, people.

Not sure about why you quoted my post, which was in response to Kelly saying don't gas your car 'round midnight. The point was to say 'don't gas your car in or near bad parts of town regardless of the time of day', with evidence to support the assertion. The kid killed at the gas station was accosted by possibly 4 individuals and shot by at least two of them. Don't know who you train with but I would consider that a low percentage move. Busy intersection, busy commercial area and broad daylight. Surveillance video has led to two arrests, kid is still dead

 

[MCgrease08]

The media does whatever is sexiest and gets the most clicks. "Car in the river" is the headline when the picture shows it's not even up to mid-axle. I get where you guys are coming from, but it just doesn't add up from both reading about an event and being at the event. If they wanted to make more hay of bad gun uses, there's PLENTY of meat on that bone you never hear about. An expose on how many accidental shootings resulting in injury or death vs how many bad guys shot and how many bad guys are shot while both sides are engaged in criminal activity (drug dealers don't lose the right to self defense merely by being drug dealers...) More detailed accounts of the "normal" murders (most of them aren't sexy enough to get much air time, unless there is a racial component, a child, *sometimes* a domestic if it's a slow news day, or if there's a substantial gulf in socio-economic background.

Everybody except the participants will forget this occurred in a few months. Hell, *I'll* forget it occurred most likely because I've been to so many of them they all start to run together unless my memory is specifically routed to one for some reason.

I will add that sometimes they will hold on to something they know if we ask them to and they understand the investigative need. The majority of local reporters aren't part of some anti-gun conspiracy or narrative (but, again, some outlets are better or worse than others), and they often *think* they are doing the right thing for public safety even if they aren't because they are acting from ignorance. I'd be a terrible PIO as I can't empathize with them and their profit motive that much, but I don't hate them. Except the Indy Star. Any charge in this thread leveled at "the media" likely applies to them at least twice over.

^^^ THIS ^^^

I worked in broadcasting and local news for more than a decade, including print, radio and TV for multiple markets and outlets. Yes, many reporters are liberal leaning, but that bias tends to show up more more with national outlets.

I've been in hundreds of production meetings in multiple newsrooms. There was never a single open discussion of how to frame a story in an anti-gun way. There were plenty of discussions about how to present stories in a way to generate "conversation and engagement" on social media channels for the station, aka getting clicks, likes and shares. Outrage/anger is the number one motivating emotion that causes people to take action. It's not even close.

The media doesn't care if you're pro gun or anti gun. They only care that you care, and that you'll be ticked off when they interview someone from the other side. If you're mad, you're more likely to read, comment and share.

 

[KLB]

^^^ THIS ^^^

I worked in broadcasting and local news for more than a decade, including print, radio and TV for multiple markets and outlets. Yes, many reporters are liberal leaning, but that bias tends to show up more more with national outlets.

I've been in hundreds of production meetings in multiple newsrooms. There was never a single open discussion of how to frame a story in an anti-gun way. There were plenty of discussions about how to present stories in a way to generate "conversation and engagement" on social media channels for the station, aka getting clicks, likes and shares. Outrage/anger is the number one motivating emotion that causes people to take action. It's not even close.

The media doesn't care if you're pro gun or anti gun. They only care that you care, and that you'll be ticked off when they interview someone from the other side. If you're mad, you're more likely to read, comment and share.

How many are inherently biased against guns though? That could also be why stories tend to slant against guns.

 

[MCgrease08]

How many are inherently biased against guns though? That could also be why stories tend to slant against guns.

It's a factor for sure. But again, more prevalent at the national level because those folks have climbed the ladder and played the corporate media game of kiss ass. More local newsrooms are made up of people that actually live in that market and their politics tend to trend more inline with the local population. I worked with a few folks that I could openly talk guns with.

As BBI said, I think pure ignorance is usually the biggest factor.

 

[JEBland]

@BehindBlueI's : It seems like you were wanting us to have some take-aways with this incident. Anything we missed?

I got the impression that he was waiting until the case was more settled to weigh in. Note the (not direct quote) "some of the people in this thread pointed out potential issues."