Re: Not always joking, it seems

pullo wrote:
> 
> "David McMillan" <spamtrap@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:I4SdnRvz9L6lUV3anZ2dnUVZ_vOlnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>> Another is Yet Another School shooting, maybe three years ago (I can't 
>> dig up the reference, alas), which did not make the news very big b/c 
>> the body count was so low.  The *reason* that the body count was so 
>> low was that the shooter missed with most of the shots he got off, and 
>> when he was reloading a couple of classmates with lots of hands-on gun 
>> experience saw their window of op****tunity and jumped him.
> 
> Why is the characteristic of having 'lot's off hands-on gun experience' 
> connected to the idea of being able to understand that while reloading 
> there was a window of op****tunity?
> 
> Was that specifically a part of the account you remember or is it what 
> you assume?

	It's what I remember hearing at the time of the re****t, but obviously 
my memory may be faulty.  Add NaCl as required.

	It rings true to me, in that someone with a fair amount of hands-on 
experience with firearms is likely to recognize the reloading window of 
op****tunity faster, *understand* it at a gut level faster, and have a 
better instinctive estimate of just how long that window of op****tunity 
will last.  Also, someone with hands-on experience is probably less 
likely to fall prey to the "rabbit staring at a rattles****" paralysis 
effect.
	None of which is by any means decisive.  But, all other things being 
equal, I would find it reasonable that a person or persons with a lot of 
hands-on experience (as opposed to someone who just plays with a gun 
once in a while) would be better-equipped mentally to react in such a 
situation.