So the Welfare Bombers slipped into the crowd at and near the finish line of the Boston Marathon and left their deadly packages. If there’d been more armed civilians in the crowd maybe an LTC holder would have spotted the Tsarnaevs and prevented them from completing their murderous mission; what with armed citizens being more situationally aware than unarmed “condition white” civilians. Maybe not. Be that as it may, there was one man who could have used a gun to spoil the Tsarnaev’s plans before they had a shootout with Watertown cops, where 15 people were injured (most likely by police crossfire). That man’s name is “Danny” . . .
The 26-year-old Chinese entrepreneur had just pulled his new Mercedes to the curb on Brighton Avenue to answer a text when an old sedan swerved behind him, slamming on the brakes. A man in dark clothes got out and approached the passenger window. It was nearly 11 p.m. last Thursday.
The man rapped on the glass, speaking quickly. Danny, unable to hear him, lowered the window — and the man reached an arm through, unlocked the door, and climbed in, brandishing a silver handgun.
“Don’t be stupid,” he told Danny. He asked if he had followed the news about Monday’s Boston Marathon bombings. Danny had, down to the release of the grainy suspect photos less than six hours earlier.
“I did that,” said the man, who would later be identified as Tamerlan Tsarnaev. “And I just killed a policeman in Cambridge.”
Again, firearm-inspired situational awareness. Who amongst TTAG’s Armed Intelligentsia would have lowered the window to speak with anyone rapping on their glass—especially given the day’s events?
The Boston Globe has a lengthy account of what happened next:
Danny described 90 harrowing minutes, first with the younger brother following in a second car, then with both brothers in the Mercedes, where they openly discussed driving to New York, though Danny could not make out if they were planning another attack. Throughout the ordeal, he did as they asked while silently analyzing every threatened command, every overheard snatch of dialogue for clues about where and when they might kill him.
“Death is so close to me,” Danny recalled thinking. His life had until that moment seemed ascendant, from a province in central China to graduate school at Northeastern University to a Kendall Square start-up.
“I don’t want to die,” he thought. “I have a lot of dreams that haven’t come true yet.”
“Danny” had 90 minutes to shoot his kidnappers. You know, if he’d had a gun. It seems that the idea that their victim might be armed never occurred to the brothers Tsarnaev. There’s no indication that they frisked “Danny” at any point during his ordeal.
When the younger brother, Dzhokhar, was forced to go inside the Shell Food Mart to pay, older brother Tamerlan put his gun in the door pocket to fiddle with a navigation device — letting his guard down briefly after a night on the run. Danny then did what he had been rehearsing in his head. In a flash, he unbuckled his seat belt, opened the door, stepped through, slammed it behind, and sprinted off at an angle that would be a hard shot for any marksman.
I’m not sure which I would have done: unbuckled, opened the door and run or unbuckled my belt, drawn my carry gun and double tapped Tamerlan. Both would have required some forethought and physical coordination under extreme stress.
I’d probably have gone for the gun. Who wants to depend on a terrorist’s lack of marksmanship for his or her survival? Equally, who wouldn’t want to have a gun in a situation like that?
In reporting the carjacking, the media was clearly shocked that “Danny” survived his encounter with the terrorist duo. Roger that. He was lucky. More than that, it should have been a defensive gun use.