Posted on 11/14/2008 2:23:54 AM PST by hoosierham
Follow link to story acknowkedging the danger of gun-free signs and zones,and the "new" police tactics.
The article you linked to is a must read for any patrol officer.
Prior to Columbine, the active shooter scenario was relatively unknown. Police training was oriented to a hostage situation, where waiting for SWAT is an appropriate response. Also, most officers trained to clear buildings were trained to clear buildings where somebody was hiding or lying in wait.
In the article, Sgt. Haggard points out that in an active shooter situation, a single officer may apply enough pressure on the shooter to disrupt his plans and end, or at least contain the situation until backup arrives.
For a CCW holder, the situation would be more dicey due to lack of equipment, etc. On the other hand, the CCW might be more likely to be right there and a surprise to the would be shooter.
Wow, we had to wait for the experts to weigh in on this? Wonder if we can start the genocide hearings against the gun banners?
Agree with what you wrote.
My concern is how a CCW holder, who is on the scene and armed (dig at all those “gun free” zones), can respond aggressively to the active shooter without being mistaken by the first responding officer AS the active shooter.
The inclination of the officer, as described by Sgt Haggard in his account of the incident he was involved in, is to immediately focus on the individual with a gun out who is shooting. That is perfectly understandable. But, in a CCW environment, is that person really the active shooter OR the CCW holder who is just trying to pin down or eliminate the active shooter. The first responding officer, arriving in the middle of the event and with imperfect information, has to sort out it quickly since time, as the article noted, enables the real active shooter to seek out and shoot more innocent victims.
Being very vocal would be a start.
For the paltry sum of $9.99 you can get one of these nifty little signs to put on the back of your jacket.
Optionally you could choose from an asortment shuh as, FBI ATF or whatever you want. If you work for the MSM you may want the special YELLOW stripe that runs vertically up the middle of your spine.
LOL!!
Have to remember to yell "Drop the gun!" ,"Give yourself up!", etc. at the bad guy.
If you hear a voice behind you saying drop it, will have gamble that it is a cop and not a bad guy (turning around holding the gun to check out to confirm it is a police officer might be unhealthy) and drop to the ground and hope 1) It really is a cop and 2) the cop can deal with the incoming fire from the bad guy.
Great points.
...I am a strong advocate for the single officer response as being a valid tactical response in some active-shooter situations. The history of modern active-shooters in the U.S. shows us that the shooter(s) will be killed by the responders, will give up, or will kill themselves when the first hint of tactical pressure is placed upon them. Although not all “shooter” incidents have worked out this way, the vast majority have fallen into one of the three typical end results...
Since response to an active-shooter incident is a race, a race between the responder(s) stopping the shooter and the shooter racking up a greater and greater body count, I strongly advocate that officers should move to contact as quickly as possible, and by themselves if need be, to expedite stopping the shooter from killing more victims...
...Everyone who carries a gun for duty or protection should be aware of the physical and mental aspects of responding to critical incidents. It should suffice to say that such aspects of the human condition as fight or flight response, adrenalin stress, tunnel vision, auditory exclusion, etc. should be well known to any serious student of preparation for combat or self defense.
This knowledge and training can be a very solid advantage to the first responder who is going after an active-shooter as the shooter will very likely not be educated and trained to deal with these aspects of armed conflict. In my opinion, the shooter will very likely never see the first responder coming...
...In less extreme examples, I have read concern that officer could be ambushed by the shooter. I have two problems with that train of thought; 1. It’s never happened (although I know that doesn’t mean it could some day) 2. Laying in wait for first responders is NOT active shooting.
If the first responder has no idea where the shooter is and will have to search to find them then a single officer response would not be appropriate. However I strongly feel that if a single officer can see the shooter, or can hear the shots close by, that they should immediately move to contact and engage the shooter. This has been successfully accomplished too many times for anyone to say that it is not a valid tactic.
Bet the study cost a bundle too.
Yes, talking constantly and loudly about about who you are, why you have a gun, and what you are trying to do would give the arriving officer some information they would otherwise have to infer from what he or she was seeing. Of course, obeying their directions would reinforce the notion you are one of the “good guys.” (And I don’t think it would be that much of a gamble to trust that the voice behind you is a police officer - assuming they properly identify themselves - because an active shooter in that position would, well, just shoot you.)
They are probably still going to treat you with suspicion and secure your weapon but maybe you can avoid having them just shoot you out of hand the moment they come upon you.
Many malls and workplaces also place signs at their entrances prohibiting firearms on the premises.
Now tacticians believe the signs themselves may be an invitation to the active killers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, DUH!
They may select schools and shopping malls because of the large number of defenseless victims and the virtual guarantee no on the scene one is armed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It took a statistical study to figure out that these people
NEVER attack a gathering of deer hunters who are sighting in their hunting rifles. A police firing range often has quite a few people available as targets, wonder why they never go there. How stupid can people get, is there no limit?
Someone here at Free Republic uses this true statement as a tagline:
“Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.”
Sort of nicely sums up the whole rationale for citizen gun ownership, don’t you think?
Exactly!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.