ABC's 20/20: "If I Only Had a Gun" (a rigged "experiment")

ABC's 20/20: "If I Only Had a Gun" (a rigged "experiment")

From the YouTube video description:

"ABC's 20/20 did this experiment with the help of the Bethlehem, PA police department to see how someone would really react to a gunman entering a room."

Links below are to the YouTube videos, and to my mirrors if they are pulled from YouTube:

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MX3QtumSuE
  
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxNRLMWkjc8
  
• http://207.234.249.73/gunfax/If_I_Only_Had_A_Gun_Part_1.flv
  
• http://207.234.249.73/gunfax/If_I_Only_Had_A_Gun_Part_2.flv
  

It's clear that this "experiment" is not only staged, but rigged!

It's easy to see that the first two times and the fourth time, the "shooter" shot the instructor, then (obviously with advance knowledge) immediately went after the defensive firearm carrier, who was conveniently in the center of the crowd each time!

While they didn't show this immediate secondary target pursuit the third time, the "defender" is always in the same seat!

This was VERY deceptive and slanted!

In the fifth "experiment" shown, a shooter pops us from among the class members and begins shooting the defender.

This scenario is so slanted that it's beyond the pale.

Scenario six again shows the defender being targeted almost immediately.

I figured something was up when they touted her training and skills, yet I saw her blinking while shooting.

The "assailant" in all these "experiments" is a tactically trained, practicing police officer and instructor with advance knowledge that he has an armed opponent and exactly where he will be sitting!

Who could be expected to do well or even survive in that scenario?!

Lastly, the defenders were all wearing the same clothes, a long baggy shirt.

If they had been allowed to dress the way they wanted, they would have probably made clothing choices with firearm accessibility in mind.

While I agree on the need for training, each defender would have been just as dead without the firearm if so specifically targeted!

What if a defender unknown to the assailant had been present?

I guess ABC didn't think of that - or did they?!

It seems like this piece is trying to convince us all that having a defensive firearm is just way too much for us to handle.

This despite the evidence that shows hundreds of thousands of (even as many as 2 million) successful defensive uses of civilian firearms every year and other statistic that shows police officers are 5.5 times much more likely than a civilian to shoot the wrong person!

I wonder how John Stossel really feels about this one?!

I say, "Gimme a break!"

# # #

Update 04/17/2009

Just a question:

How often have you heard of a mass shooting in which one of the civilian victims killed has a sidearm?