The real thing is never scripted out with rules and caveats and disparities like this. [More]
Case in point-- attackers typically don't have 21 years of SWAT experience. Plenty have not had body armor to necessitate a head shot rule. And let's see how average "Only Ones" would fare.
Just because you can get one scenario to trend in the way it's being steered doesn't mean all will go that way, and certainly does nothing to negate the fact that with a choice comes a chance.
But the average ignoramus just seeing this will be going "See? SEEEE...???" just like he -- or "reporter" Brett Shipp -- is now some kind of authority.
[Via William T]
Hmm. Amateurs with limited training, not told what the scenarios would be, versus a SWAT member/instructor with 22 years of experience and body armor.
ReplyDeleteAnd the amateurs still won half the time in both scenarios.
22-year SWAT guy, with body armor, and the noobs still win half the time?
ReplyDeleteI'll take those odds, and keep carrying my pistol for defensive purposes.
That test should be repeated with both the instructors and participants having similar experience.
ReplyDeleteSince the SWAT guy instructor took fatal shots from people with very little experience,what would happen if he went up against guys and ladies who had that same 22 years of experience?
Would he take fatal hits every time?
If the inexperienced guys in this test did as well as they did,shouldn't the more experienced people score much better?