You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Dealing with the active shooter
- Thread starter Jt1971
- Start date
Double Naught Spy
New member
Shot him in the leg because of a stress flinch or premature trigger pull as he was bringing the gun up. No follow shots on a downed but still armed and active risk.
Right, and that was from a trained security guard who was a retired detective, so a guy with years of police experience and training under his belt.
I did find it interesting that when those who were ordered to leave did find him, he went to the room, poked his head in, the gunman invited him in, and he asked if the gunman had a real gun or not and then opted to wait outside. One of the board members commented that the security guard, a retired officer, was trained to wait for backup. Backup arrived well after being useful.
I assumed JT meant for us to view the video and react as if we were physically viewing the scenario unfold as on the video.
If it were that way, . . . my 1911 would have been out as soon as I could have done so without bringing attention to myself.
I would not have hesitated, . . . I would have shot him, . . . period, . . . end of debate.
It was totally obvious that he had what looked like a hi-cap semi-auto, . . . and with the spray paint fiasco, . . . he had already demonstrated a serious lack of good social skills.
Producing the gun tells me it is probably going to get someone killed, . . . better the lunatic than some innocent person who came to the board meeting to get informed, . . . not to get shot.
Call me heartless if you want to, . . . but there is a line that people just don't need to cross, . . . there are consequences to doing so, . . . this would have been one of them.
May God bless,
Dwight
If it were that way, . . . my 1911 would have been out as soon as I could have done so without bringing attention to myself.
I would not have hesitated, . . . I would have shot him, . . . period, . . . end of debate.
It was totally obvious that he had what looked like a hi-cap semi-auto, . . . and with the spray paint fiasco, . . . he had already demonstrated a serious lack of good social skills.
Producing the gun tells me it is probably going to get someone killed, . . . better the lunatic than some innocent person who came to the board meeting to get informed, . . . not to get shot.
Call me heartless if you want to, . . . but there is a line that people just don't need to cross, . . . there are consequences to doing so, . . . this would have been one of them.
May God bless,
Dwight
Situationally dependent.
If I had a firearm and a clean shot, I'd take it. I've lost one friend to an active shooter, and don't want to lose any more!
Without a firearm, I'd probably try to escape with anyone I could get to an exit. The exceptions for me, are if I am trapped or see an opportunity to get in an unopposed hit/stab. I figure I have a decent chance if I can get the first blow and stay inside the weapon's arc (easier if the bg has a rifle).
A few years back, I was in an area that had a false alarm active shooter lockdown. It was there I decided to stay in a locked room unless the shooter passed the door. I was not ready to listen to my friends die while I was behind the shooter's location. If I had heard/seen them pass, I would have tried for multiple back-stabs (no carry zone). Thank God it was a false alarm, as that is not the best tactical plan (but one I would take if in that situation).
If I had a firearm and a clean shot, I'd take it. I've lost one friend to an active shooter, and don't want to lose any more!
Without a firearm, I'd probably try to escape with anyone I could get to an exit. The exceptions for me, are if I am trapped or see an opportunity to get in an unopposed hit/stab. I figure I have a decent chance if I can get the first blow and stay inside the weapon's arc (easier if the bg has a rifle).
A few years back, I was in an area that had a false alarm active shooter lockdown. It was there I decided to stay in a locked room unless the shooter passed the door. I was not ready to listen to my friends die while I was behind the shooter's location. If I had heard/seen them pass, I would have tried for multiple back-stabs (no carry zone). Thank God it was a false alarm, as that is not the best tactical plan (but one I would take if in that situation).
Blue Steel
New member
I would (1) run for it, while (2) going for cover, and (3) hitting the ground. If possible I would (4) whip out my concealed carry 1911 and engage the villain.
Don't see much upside to freezing or reasoning with an active shooter.
Don't see much upside to freezing or reasoning with an active shooter.
Assuming you are not armed, the recommended steps for an active shooter scenario are, in order:
1. Evacuate, if possible.
2. Hide out. Barricade yourself in a secure area with only one entry point. Call 9-1-1, wait for responders. Provide as much detail as possible regarding the number of shooters, their demographics, their locations, and their weapons.
3. Take action as a last resort. Active shooters are rarely determined fighters and direct, aggressive action can end a situation quickly. Use whatever items are available as weapons.
4. Assuming you've trained for this, shake and slide a punctured soda can across the hallway as a distraction before performing a 3-point tactical roll while firing dual nickel-plated Desert Eagles. However, in a retail force protection scenerio (eg, the mall), you may wish to use more sophisticated tactics that can be learned on the interweb and through Tier 1 SpecOps training. Extensive retail security data analysis has shown that the majority of criminals will stop at Chick-fil-a to fuel up prior to a heist; USE THIS TO YOUR ADVANTAGE.
Furthermore, when responders arrive, follow their directions and stay out of their way. Do not gather around them or yell at them, keep your hands empty and visible. If not given orders otherwise, get low and briskly move in the direction of wherever they came from, as that path has been cleared a safe.
1. Evacuate, if possible.
2. Hide out. Barricade yourself in a secure area with only one entry point. Call 9-1-1, wait for responders. Provide as much detail as possible regarding the number of shooters, their demographics, their locations, and their weapons.
3. Take action as a last resort. Active shooters are rarely determined fighters and direct, aggressive action can end a situation quickly. Use whatever items are available as weapons.
4. Assuming you've trained for this, shake and slide a punctured soda can across the hallway as a distraction before performing a 3-point tactical roll while firing dual nickel-plated Desert Eagles. However, in a retail force protection scenerio (eg, the mall), you may wish to use more sophisticated tactics that can be learned on the interweb and through Tier 1 SpecOps training. Extensive retail security data analysis has shown that the majority of criminals will stop at Chick-fil-a to fuel up prior to a heist; USE THIS TO YOUR ADVANTAGE.
Furthermore, when responders arrive, follow their directions and stay out of their way. Do not gather around them or yell at them, keep your hands empty and visible. If not given orders otherwise, get low and briskly move in the direction of wherever they came from, as that path has been cleared a safe.
Last edited:
Double Naught Spy
New member
Assuming you are not armed, the recommended steps for an active shooter scenario are, in order:
1. Evacuate, if possible.
You would think that people would figure out that an active shooter or guy that may be about to be one (as in the case of Clay Duke ordering folks out at gunpoint) would do this without second thought. If you have the chance to leave a burning building (and assuming you aren't trying to save personal belongings, etc.) then you will most likely try to get out. Fire is a pretty good motivator, but a gunman isn't and I don't know why.
In the 911 call, you can hear the female caller explaining the situation and then she asks the 911 operator if they should evacuate and the 911 operator asks if they have a plan for such an event for which the lady replies that the do not. The 911 operator consults with a person offline and then gives the caller the option to evacuate if she does not feel that she is safe where she is.
You know, the 911 operator isn't there. The cops aren't there. I am not sure that I want to rely on a person miles away to be making my self defense decisions in such a situation....but that sort of characterizes how poorly so many people are prepared for an adverse situation.
While you don't have a legal obligation to intervene I feel you and I have an ethical obligation to try to save the innocents that may be around. This is assuming a VTech/Columbine type situation.
Interesting problem. I assume that you are an innocent as well. If you intervene, you increase the number of innocents at risk. Saving yourself saves an innocent.
That isn't to say that you should not intervene, only that if you are intervening because you want to save the innocents, your actions are at odds with the intent.
Being that this was a school board meeting it was probably in a municipal building that is designated "gun free" except for BG's & those with a death wish. This happened in Panama City, FL, and I'm ignorant as to the local and state laws concerning such.
My city is currently reviewing ordinances against cc on city property after a challenge by a local citizen (NRA member) who brought to everyones attention Alabama state law that prohibits municipalities from pre-empting state law which states, "The entire subject matter of handguns is reserved to the state legislature".
We should very soon have restrictions to cc removed from all but courthouses, schools and city rec athletic events.
My city is currently reviewing ordinances against cc on city property after a challenge by a local citizen (NRA member) who brought to everyones attention Alabama state law that prohibits municipalities from pre-empting state law which states, "The entire subject matter of handguns is reserved to the state legislature".
We should very soon have restrictions to cc removed from all but courthouses, schools and city rec athletic events.
Amin Parker
New member
Been there. In 1999 a gangster went crazy with a 357 and 45. Shot 3 customers outside our business. I saw it all happen. He shot a teenage girl through the back, it exited her stomach and went through her arm as well. She went down and he ran to her to finish her off.
I screamed at him and he turned to me. Running at full speed while shooting. By that time i had my 870 and brought it up. He then turned around and started running, i shot him in the back of the neck. The cops found him there with both pistols which obviously turned out to be stolen. He survived.
The front of our shop had a few holes in it and the closest one was about 3 meters from me.
My answer would be to not hesitate. If someone is shooting at you, put him down immediately and dont stop until he hits the ground.
I screamed at him and he turned to me. Running at full speed while shooting. By that time i had my 870 and brought it up. He then turned around and started running, i shot him in the back of the neck. The cops found him there with both pistols which obviously turned out to be stolen. He survived.
The front of our shop had a few holes in it and the closest one was about 3 meters from me.
My answer would be to not hesitate. If someone is shooting at you, put him down immediately and dont stop until he hits the ground.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
The ethical issue is very complex and discussed here quite alot. A blanket statement that you should intervene presumes a high probability of success.
To give one example, at Columbine, the actors tried to use explosives. They really didn't work.
Let's say at a future incident, you are surrounded by innocents and a terrorist throws a grenade in your midst. Soliders have thrown themselves on them. Do you have a moral and ethical obligation to do the same?
Or do you only feel you have an obligation if you think you can pull it off with a small risk?
If 5 AK carrying gunmen are coming down the mall shooting and you have a 5 shot J, do you engage or duck into a store and out the back?
See - my point is that the cliched answer works on gun forums but it a blanket answer ignores the subtleties.
Yep, if the guy is in front of you, and you can shoot - most would probably do so. But the Tacoma Mall and Tyler court house are instructive screw ups.
At the school board, if you are sitting there and are armed, sure - it's an easy decision. Another horror that Mas Ayoob described. An officer and his child were at the mall, a gun fight among BGs breaks out. The officer puts his kid in a safe place. As the fight evolves a BG sees the kid and kills her, IIRC.
Is it moral to place your child in danger for innocents. NO easy answer.
To give one example, at Columbine, the actors tried to use explosives. They really didn't work.
Let's say at a future incident, you are surrounded by innocents and a terrorist throws a grenade in your midst. Soliders have thrown themselves on them. Do you have a moral and ethical obligation to do the same?
Or do you only feel you have an obligation if you think you can pull it off with a small risk?
If 5 AK carrying gunmen are coming down the mall shooting and you have a 5 shot J, do you engage or duck into a store and out the back?
See - my point is that the cliched answer works on gun forums but it a blanket answer ignores the subtleties.
Yep, if the guy is in front of you, and you can shoot - most would probably do so. But the Tacoma Mall and Tyler court house are instructive screw ups.
At the school board, if you are sitting there and are armed, sure - it's an easy decision. Another horror that Mas Ayoob described. An officer and his child were at the mall, a gun fight among BGs breaks out. The officer puts his kid in a safe place. As the fight evolves a BG sees the kid and kills her, IIRC.
Is it moral to place your child in danger for innocents. NO easy answer.
FireForged
New member
My intent has always been to avoid/escape danger and only fight if I must. That being said, I am not a security force or a diplomat. I have no intention of getting between two fighting men, chase a purse snatcher or investigate odd happenings in a dark alley. If a bad guy is running around with a gun, I will try to get away from him.. If I cant, I will fight him.
Deputy Dog
New member
About 5 or six years ago, I worked a part-time job for a private security firm, I was armed at the location I was covering. I walked accross the street to the walgreens to get A Water and a Bag of Chips for my sandwich. I walked back to the High Rises I was assigned to and heard a bunch of yelling and screaming before I entered the building. When I turned to see what was going on, there were four boston PO's surrounding a white Box Truck with a box opener weilding maniac on the roof of said box truck. He had just walked into the walgreens I was just in seconds before, and just started slicing random customers with the box cutter. It was later determined that he suffers from helucinations and dimentia, and was not taking his meds.
People had asked me if I was in there when he was, would I have shot him, and or would I have killed him? My reply was: "I would have shot to stop the attack". I feel an obligation of moral and ethical duty to help protect those that are innocent to the best that I can. Like someone said before many times, it depends on situation. Means of egress, how many, drop on threat, shot placement and accountability, will more people get injured by my actions or by lack there of.... These are all things you have process in a matter of seconds or less. But doing nothing at all is the worse thing you can do. If everyone did nothing at all, there would be alot less good people in the world.
Just my 02. though!
DD
People had asked me if I was in there when he was, would I have shot him, and or would I have killed him? My reply was: "I would have shot to stop the attack". I feel an obligation of moral and ethical duty to help protect those that are innocent to the best that I can. Like someone said before many times, it depends on situation. Means of egress, how many, drop on threat, shot placement and accountability, will more people get injured by my actions or by lack there of.... These are all things you have process in a matter of seconds or less. But doing nothing at all is the worse thing you can do. If everyone did nothing at all, there would be alot less good people in the world.
Just my 02. though!
DD
As a LEO I would engage the shooter of course, but even when I'm not on duty I guess I would do the same. I think it's my duty to help other people if I have the means to do so. I think I would feel really bad if I had run away instead of helping other poeple who are in danger.
After I'd been a police officer for twenty-two years, our Sheriff instituted a School Resource Officer program. I'd never done anything like that and stuck my hand in the air to volunteer.
Eight years later, I've had more active shooter training than most folks, all of it in a school-house scenario with innocents around. The sooner I engage the shooter, the better off everyone will be. I want to take his focus off the innocents and put it on to me. The only time I might hesitate is to "call it in", to get the cavalry on the way. If I have time to do that, then I continue to close the distance with extreme aggression until it's over, one way or the other.
When it's finished, someone is going to need an ambulance, and a mop.
Eight years later, I've had more active shooter training than most folks, all of it in a school-house scenario with innocents around. The sooner I engage the shooter, the better off everyone will be. I want to take his focus off the innocents and put it on to me. The only time I might hesitate is to "call it in", to get the cavalry on the way. If I have time to do that, then I continue to close the distance with extreme aggression until it's over, one way or the other.
When it's finished, someone is going to need an ambulance, and a mop.
I voted for open fire, but I am an LEO and that is what we train for. In fact, I had refresher active shooter training just last week.
I wouldn't just pull my gun and start shooting unless I was close enough and had a clear shot.
But my main objective would to be to get the shooter's attention away from potential victims and on me.
scpapa
I wouldn't just pull my gun and start shooting unless I was close enough and had a clear shot.
But my main objective would to be to get the shooter's attention away from potential victims and on me.
scpapa
Double Naught Spy
New member
Yep, our public school "active shooter" officers are some of the most highly trained we have. Like PawPaw, their job isn't to call it in, observe, direct the calvary. They don't stop and help the wounded or direct the fleeing masses. Their job is to charge into the middle of what is going on and deal with the bad guy(s). I have a great deal of respect for the guys and so far none have had to deal with such a situation, but for the life of me it sounds like an extremely high risk position. These guys don't stop and gear up with all the super SWAT body armor. The wear typical street body armor and duty gear. One of the officers mentioned that he likes to carry more magazines than most officers because he won't be going back to his car for more ammo, armor, a long gun, or anything else. He goes in with what is on his person and nothing more.
I am glad they have those folks and they probably have some of the safer police jobs in the department, unless there is an active shooter situation and then they will end up having one of the most dangerous.
I am glad they have those folks and they probably have some of the safer police jobs in the department, unless there is an active shooter situation and then they will end up having one of the most dangerous.