Disturbia, fiction, family, friends, and everything else between the lions.
Published on January 10, 2011 By Tova7 In Current Events

"According to the sheriff’s department, Patricia Maisch, who was in the back of the line waiting to get her photograph taken with Giffords on Saturday, rushed to grab the gunman’s magazine after he started shooting.

That pause gave time for two others, Roger Salzgeber and Bill Badger, to tackle him to the ground. Then another bystander, Joseph Zamudio, who was leaving the local Walgreens at the time, jumped in to restrain the gunman’s legs...

"This is one of the most heroic acts I’ve ever seen,” he [Dupnik} told Fox News. “This lady was standing in line to have her picture taken with Gabrielle when all hell broke loose. And for whatever reason, she decided something had to be done. … She might have saved many, many lives.”

~http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/09/unsuspecting-heroes-help-contain-violence-arizona-shooting-spree

A few weeks ago I wrote an article about a woman acting to save her male colleagues from a gunman while they sat and watched.  Her actions were poo-pooed by some.  I believe that scenario made an accurate statement about how women and men's roles have changed in our society.  How they’ve changed and to what degree is for you to decide, I certainly have my own opinions.

Here we are AGAIN, another gunman, another WOMAN determined to keep him from killing.  By all the accounts I’ve read so far, she was the first to act, the first to DO SOMETHING….and when she did, it set off a chain of events (others jumping in) that stopped this killer in his tracks.

As a woman I’m proud of her.  But I have to wonder….if she wouldn’t have acted, put her life on the line…would he have reloaded and taken more lives?  I’m sure there are plenty of people who consider her foolish, going after a gunman with nothing more than her bare hand.  What nerve.  What foolishness.

What bravery.

Good on ya Patricia.  Good on ya!

 

 

 

Link to my original article:  http://lifehappens.joeuser.com/article/402371/Cowardly_Heroes_Not


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jan 12, 2011

The time for talk ends when the weapon comes out.

not necessarily.  The one with the gun in his hand is in charge at least for the moment.  If he wants to talk...you talk.  That's called  hostage negotiations and is used all the time with great success.  Remember the lady who wrote a book and was called a hero because she talked an intruder out of whatever he was going to do to her?  If I remember right, she led him to Jesus even praying with him. 

In any type of tactical training one of the things they teach you is  to fight only with an equal or greater force unless you have a tactical advantage.  So like I said earlier a handbag against a gun is NOT a greater or equal force.  Obviously it didn't work.  Neither do you attempt to fight a gun with a knife.  Again it's a lesser force.  But if you have a tactical advantage you can use the lesser force successfully.  So for instance if a man with a knife comes up behind a gunman and is able to slit his throat, then that would be an exception to the lesser force having an advantage against the greater force. 

In this latest case, the gun jammed and it turned out to be a tactical advantage which the men who tackled him and the woman who pushed the gun away were ready to act upon.   

 

on Jan 12, 2011

Ginger acted when the guy had a loaded weapon. The others acted during the time the shooter was closest to their equal, when he had spent the last round in his magazine and before he could reload the next magazine (no chance or action prior to this). The second action was much better thought out, with less time available, than the first action. Had anyone waited until he reloaded and tried to slap the weapon from the shooters hand, I would have given that person the same grief I did Ginger.

on Jan 13, 2011

"If we'd fought these women instead of the men," another marine comments, "we might have got our asses kicked."

              - Generation Kill

 

In reality, women realize that it is less likely someone will kill them.

on Jan 13, 2011

In reality, women realize that it is less likely someone will kill them.

I can see the logic in that, yet I wonder if that is really what is going through ones head when the rubber hits the road.

on Jan 13, 2011

In reality, women realize that it is less likely someone will kill them.

Tell that to the congresswoman who he went there to kill.

I don't think that's accurate; not in today's society.  I'd like to say it is, but the type of men who go on killing sprees are not respecters of gender, or as this latest shooter shows, age.

 

I would have given that person the same grief I did Ginger.

lol, I know you would.  I'm just proud they did something.....because there are many times when people don't...even when an opportunity presents itself...for whatever reasons...

The one with the gun in his hand is in charge at least for the moment.

Right but when that moment ends...THAT is where people diverge and some act and some don't.

 

on Feb 27, 2011

In any type of tactical training one of the things they teach you is to fight only with an equal or greater force unless you have a tactical advantage. So like I said earlier a handbag against a gun is NOT a greater or equal force. Obviously it didn't work. Neither do you attempt to fight a gun with a knife. Again it's a lesser force. But if you have a tactical advantage you can use the lesser force successfully. So for instance if a man with a knife comes up behind a gunman and is able to slit his throat, then that would be an exception to the lesser force having an advantage against the greater force

KFC: Most people cannot spell 'tactical Training' much less having a use for it. I suspect a ‘tactical advantage’ is just as foreign too.  Let me play devil’s advocate here: (I am good at that you know, hehehe)

I believe in humanity and do not have a problem defending it, even at the cost of my own life (I like to think so anyway). I am tactically trained and very comfortable around weapons and agree that a headlong death play is not a good thing, except under very special conditions. It doesn’t take long to get to the point where … but you have got to have the time. I have found from experience that people respond to immediate life threatening circumstances in one of 3 ways:

  • They run,
  • They freeze or
  • They fight.

None of these responses are concerned with active thought (not enough time) and thoughts only come into play once one of these 3 conditions are met. When this happens and circumstances allow you, one can override their ‘gut reaction’ and bring the brain back into active play … and proceed.

No one sane walks into these types of situations and most would never even consider them possible after all … It couldn’t happen to them anyway, Could it? I agree “might make right” is always a good thing to keep in the mind, but there are other things to be considered too … if one HAS TIME.

on Feb 27, 2011

tova7:

I cannot recall your second story (my problem not yours) so I cannot comment on it. The first story has been re-analyzed enough IMO. Food for thought- "Most heroes do not want to be one and most people who flaunt their heroism ... aren't". Hum, not sure if that applies here, but it sounded good to me, hehehe.

2 Pages1 2