+1
Would help if spelt right. Charl van Wyk, Shooting Back.
Picky, picky. Been a while since I'd talked to him.
I do get the newsletter he sends out a few times a year. He was attacked by bandits while out trying to do his missionary work. Shot back at them too. He said witnesses indicated he'd hit at least one of them. Again, SEVERAL attackers ran screaming like little girls when ONE dude stands his ground and fights back.
Truth of the matter is that simply shooting back at all is, in the vast majority of cases, far more important than caliber, mag capacity, or even marksmanship. In the church attack, Charl hit 1 of the terrorists (non-life threatening wound) from a distance beyond what most of us would consider ideal for a snubbie .38. His other 4 shots totally missed. They still ran. In the bandit attack he had a "better" gun (don't remember but it was an auto-loader, so probably a 9x19 of some sort). No idea how many shots he fired, but again, only hit one attacker. They ran again.
The biggest issues are to A) Have a gun of any description, and B) Have the courage to stand up and actually shoot back. Even a lowly .38 snubbie with standard pressure ammo, and no reloads can be quite effective. More is better, sure. But not strictly necessary when dealing with cowards like Laughner, or common criminals, or even most terrorists. Determined, military trained/disciplined attackers are a different story of course.
