Active Shooter Study

The 'training ' I received for active shooters at my workplace indicated that immediate engagement is now policy, instead of waiting for the SWAT team. Resistance by potential victims is also recommended if escape is not possible. The idea is to minimize the number of victims.
 
note that trained professional police (line officers), generally do not try to "stop" an active shooter. They contain the area while the tactical specialists (SWAT) does the hunting.

Actually, active shooter training is exactly the opposite. After Columbine, when "line" officers waited for SWAT, while kids were getting killed, the active shooter courses teach the first responding officers to immediately stop the threat, regardless who or how many officers there may be. I've been through the training twice now, and it's good stuff.
https://www.fletc.gov/training-program/active-shooter-threat-training-program
 
A couple of years ago I stumbled across a spreadsheet that someone had compiled with pretty much all the data you're looking for. I didn't save it or bookmark it because it wasn't of interest to me beyond a first read, but it's likely still out there if you search the Internet.
 
Studies are nice but they are just that, studies. It's been my experience that all the training in the world cannot prepare one for a particular incident unless, by some stroke of a magic wand, all the parameters of the training scenario are exactly reproduced and created in the real world. Training scenarios are usually replications of something that has happened in the real world so to train for such a situation means a duplication of a situation. What we, as intelligent beings have to do, is absorb all that training and be able to think on our feet. It's nice that we may know in passing what the statistics say about what drives a lunatic to do a mass shooting, what type of gun(s) he is bringing, etc. Again, not really helpful.

As a grunt in the jungle, I trained for nearly a year stateside before being deployed. All that training was nearly useless as the actual field experience taught me what to expect and full well knowing that nearly identical situations did not result in nearly identical actions, conclusions and results. Train like the BG is bringing an army. Prepare for the worst and bring your best game.

As a Federal Agent, training was intense and frequent. Simulations and range time were intense. However, in the field, I cannot recall one situation that was like a training scenario. Training gives you the basement of the building and your brains put up the rest of the structure while you are deep in the fire. Thinking under fire comes from experience. Not many of us have reached that plateau, thank goodness.

And with what seems to be a rash of mass shootings, be smart. If you are a CCW holder, make sure that gun is on you and be able to protect your family, friends, and innocent bystanders. Wouldn't you just love to see a headline that reads something like, "Bad guy intending to kill movie goers is taken out by a citizen with a legal gun and permit to carry it. Only injury is to the bad guy."
 
I don't agree that any shooter/shooting is an active shooter . My understanding of the term "active shooter" is someone who continues to shoot all the while looking for more and more targets until they are stopped or kill them selves . A drive by is a one moment one time event , like a robbery , or other shootings where the shooter had one goal and when accomplished they stop shooting .

I think we all know hand gun calibers will cause less damage then a rifle or shotgun so it's not unreasonable to conclude the higher powered firearms would have a higher percentage of fatalities . A 30-06 to the chest is not going to need the same critical shot placement as a 9mm to cause incapacitation .

This graph would confirm the findings that hand guns are used more the any other weapon when it comes to murder .
w620afe014391829c8524fb.jpg
 
As others stated, my understanding is policy indicates the first responding officer engage the shooter almost everywhere. Even the diamond tactic, where officers wait until four are on scene to engage has been thrown out. The reasoning being almost all shooters seem to retreat or suicide once engaged.

A mass shooting does not enter into my decision to carry. The probability of one occurring in my vicinity is so low it does not come close to justifying carrying on a daily basis. There are a lot of unknown variables that go into what my reaction would be if in that situation.
 
Back
Top