Active Shooter Response

[stroo]

Interesting article on new views of how police should respond to active shooter situations in schools, malls, etc.: http://www.policeone.com/active-shooter ... e-killers/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I found the following particularly interesting. You could conclude from this points that having a CHL in the school with a gun might be more effective than anything else. They also lead to the conclusion that we should be teaching people to defend themselves rather than teaching compliances with assailants.

Borsch, who logged 17 years as a part-time SWAT team member before retiring from street work, has analyzed more than 90 active-shooter incidents on the basis of data largely ferreted out from Internet reports. Most involved schools and colleges, but workplaces, shopping malls, churches and other public places are also represented. Among his findings that have helped shape his tactical thinking:

• 98% of active killers act alone.

• 80% have long guns, 75% have multiple weapons (about 3 per incident), and they sometimes bring hundreds of extra rounds of ammunition to the shooting site.

• Despite such heavy armaments and an obsession with murder at close range, they have an average hit rate of less than 50%.

• They strike “stunned, defenseless innocents via surprise ambush. On a level playing field, the typical active killer would be a no-contest against anyone reasonably capable of defending themselves.”

• “They absolutely control life and death until they stop at their leisure or are stopped.” They do not take hostages, do not negotiate.

• They generally try to avoid police, do not hide or lie in wait for officers and “typically fold quickly upon armed confrontation.”

• 90% commit suicide on-site. “Surrender or escape attempts are unlikely.”

[trvlgnome]

I admit that I didn't read the actual article but, based on your outline of his findings; the first thing that jumped out at me was the list of places where most active shootings would occur. It looks like a list of "No Gun Zones" if the Brady's had their way. Good argument for doing away with the ones we already have.

[Excaliber]

Interesting article on new views of how police should respond to active shooter situations in schools, malls, etc.: http://www.policeone.com/active-shooter ... e-killers/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I found the following particularly interesting. You could conclude from this points that having a CHL in the school with a gun might be more effective than anything else. They also lead to the conclusion that we should be teaching people to defend themselves rather than teaching compliances with assailants.

Borsch, who logged 17 years as a part-time SWAT team member before retiring from street work, has analyzed more than 90 active-shooter incidents on the basis of data largely ferreted out from Internet reports. Most involved schools and colleges, but workplaces, shopping malls, churches and other public places are also represented. Among his findings that have helped shape his tactical thinking:

• 98% of active killers act alone.

• 80% have long guns, 75% have multiple weapons (about 3 per incident), and they sometimes bring hundreds of extra rounds of ammunition to the shooting site.

• Despite such heavy armaments and an obsession with murder at close range, they have an average hit rate of less than 50%.

• They strike “stunned, defenseless innocents via surprise ambush. On a level playing field, the typical active killer would be a no-contest against anyone reasonably capable of defending themselves.”

• “They absolutely control life and death until they stop at their leisure or are stopped.” They do not take hostages, do not negotiate.

• They generally try to avoid police, do not hide or lie in wait for officers and “typically fold quickly upon armed confrontation.”

• 90% commit suicide on-site. “Surrender or escape attempts are unlikely.”

Active shooters are one of the subjects I've studied for 30 years or so, and I deliver presentations on the dynamics of these incidents and effective responses to them in various venues as part of my day job. I've spoken to Ron Borsch about his research and discovered he is a serious researcher and trainer whose findings track very closely with my own. He's well worth listening to.

Ron is the lead trainer at an Ohio police academy. He advocates an aggressive entry and search for the shooter by the first officer at an active shooter scene, without waiting for 2 or 3 others to form a team as many departments now require. His reasoning is based on his concept of "the stopwatch of death" which shows that an active shooter will attack 3 - 4 victims per minute until he either commits suicide or is isolated and contained or engaged with deadly force. This was the same conclusion I reached in my own response plans for my police department when I was responsible for making those decisions.

My research shows that when an active shooter incident begins, the resources that matter most are the ones in the possession of the people immediately around the offender. Outside help will be called, but will arrive too late to make a difference for most victims. A single competent off duty LEO or CHL holder can stop a slaughter cold, as Jean Assam proved during the active shooter incident at her church in Colorado.

[Excaliber]

Excaliber, I don't know if you're familiar with the St James Church Massacre in Cape Town, South Africa (I lived a few miles away when this happened) - if not, it might give you more data to work with:

From Wikipedia:

The attack occurred during the Sunday evening service. Sichomiso Nonxuba, Bassie Mkhumbuzi, Gcinikhaya Makoma and Tobela Mlambisi approached the church in a vehicle stolen by Mlambisi and Makoma beforehand. Nonxuba, who commanded the unit, and Makoma entered the church armed with M26 hand grenades and R4 assault rifles. [1] They threw the grenades and then opened fire on the congregation, killing 11 and wounding 58. [2] One member of the congregation, Charl van Wyk, returned fire with a .38 special revolver, wounding one of the attackers. At this point they fled the church. Mkhumbuzi had been ordered to throw four petrol bombs into the church following the shooting, but abandoned this intention as all four fled in the vehicle.

Andy,

Thanks for the reference. I am familiar with this one, and it's a great example.

Another is the Israeli school shooting experience. That country had a number of horrific school shooting incidents. They armed teachers and parent volunteers. They had NO school shootings from 1976 through 2002 in a country that was in a continual battle against terrorism during that entire time. Can't quite say the same for the US, where schools dealt with the issue by putting up signs.

[srothstein]

Another case where the single citizen with a pistol (in this case an off duty cop) made a significant difference was the mall shooter in Salt Lake City.

[Excaliber]

Another case where the single citizen with a pistol (in this case an off duty cop) made a significant difference was the mall shooter in Salt Lake City.

Thanks, Steve.

That one is also in my database, and I cite it frequently in my presentations.

In that one, the officer involved was not carrying a spare mag or one in the chamber of his Kimber Ultra Carry at the time of the incident. Reportedly he changed those practices afterwards.

[srothstein]

What I find most interesting about that case is that it could have been any citizen. He was off duty and in the mall for a dinner with his family. A lot of people emphasize the fact that he was a cop, which certainly contributed to his knowledge of tactics and what to do, but ignore the fact that he was a citizen out with his family. he just happened to be carrying because of his LEO status instead of having a CHL.

[Excaliber]

What I find most interesting about that case is that it could have been any citizen. He was off duty and in the mall for a dinner with his family. A lot of people emphasize the fact that he was a cop, which certainly contributed to his knowledge of tactics and what to do, but ignore the fact that he was a citizen out with his family. he just happened to be carrying because of his LEO status instead of having a CHL.

The other interesting thing was that the mall was posted as a "gun free" zone, so law abiding CHL holders would not have been able to carry. The only folks who could were LEO's and the shooter, who, as usual, didn't find the signs to be a significant impediment.

Many commercial establishment owners have yet to realize that posting their property to prohibit CHL carry actually decreases safety on their premises.

They could learn a lot from the churches.

[mbw]

Excaliber,

From your posts here I gather that you have made in depth studies of these Active Shooter situations and have drawn supportable conclusions from your research. Have you made any attempt to present your findings to Gov Perry? If you have not, please do. I think that you will find him very approachable and responsive to your data.

Another poster in another location on this board made the statement "It is time that we stopped being re-active and start being pro-active in our efforts to secure our rights under the 2nd admendment". I totaly agree with that statement.

Challenge those who attempt to restrict our rights and prove our case with facts that can not be disputed.

[Excaliber]

Excaliber,

From your posts here I gather that you have made in depth studies of these Active Shooter situations and have drawn supportable conclusions from your research. Have you made any attempt to present your findings to Gov Perry? If you have not, please do. I think that you will find him very approachable and responsive to your data.

Another poster in another location on this board made the statement "It is time that we stopped being re-active and start being pro-active in our efforts to secure our rights under the 2nd admendment". I totaly agree with that statement.

Challenge those who attempt to restrict our rights and prove our case with facts that can not be disputed.

Do you have any suggestions on the best way to approach him on this subject?

[mbw]

Excaliber,

Yes I do.

Send him a letter. He actually reads and replies to most letters that are sent to him. He also has an intrest in firearms and firearms law. Don't try to say too much at one time, inform him of your background and your research and explain that you would like to make this information available to him. He has already stated publicly that he believes that a CHL should be allowed to carry anywhere. Your information and research could help him justify his beliefs.

He is just a governer and very approachable on certain topics.

[Excaliber]

Excaliber,

Yes I do.

Send him a letter. He actually reads and replies to most letters that are sent to him. He also has an intrest in firearms and firearms law. Don't try to say too much at one time, inform him of your background and your research and explain that you would like to make this information available to him. He has already stated publicly that he believes that a CHL should be allowed to carry anywhere. Your information and research could help him justify his beliefs.

He is just a governer and very approachable on certain topics.

Thanks. I'll do that.