There’s been a recent push to get guns into colleges in Florida and Texas, and the NRA has demanded legislation that allows guns in parks and around children in Tennessee. In Georgia, you can carry a gun anywhere, and it’s working out marvelously. It’s for “self-defense,” they say. But just how effective are guns for self-defense?
After all, it often seems that gun nuts think they’re Rambo or John Wayne. That a gun is a magical talisman that makes them immune to threats.
To test the idea that average, non-police gun owners are capable of defending themselves during a shooting, ABC news, partnering with the Bethlehem, Pennsylvania PD, Police Investigator Chris Benton, and firearms instructor Glen Dorney, ran an experiment with four college students, fake bullets, and a set up.
After being given a hands-on training with the weapon — including how to remove it from the holster, how to stand, how to aim, and other necessary tips — they were given a gun and told it would be needed for later. Then, they were sent to a classroom — where their class was interrupted by a gunman.
A gunman who, in this case, was firearms instructor Glen Dorney.
The four college students had varying levels of experience, ranging from experience with real firearms, to experience with airsoft guns, to no experience at all. In all cases, the result was the same: they ended up “dead,” with shots to the head and chest.
This matches nicely other evidence that guns are not a defense weapon, but a weapon that favors the aggressor: several Texas gun-nuts attempted to recreate the Charlie Hebdo massacre with everyone armed — and the results were identical to the ones in this experiment.
Watch the experiment below: