Too much bravado, and john wayne time? It was more like, lets wait and see what happens time. Your right there was confusion and terrible communication. However, thats no excuse for the amount of time it took for them to enter the building. You can't have it both ways. Either your a police officer sworn to protect and serve or your not. That means you take the risks. The pay is terrible, danger always lurking and the respect you get from some is outrageous but thats the job you signed up for. They had weapons and body body armor what did the kids have? If you got SWAT emptying 9mms down a hall you got a SWAT member not following basic rules of shooting(know thy target). Bombs going off all over the place? Only reports of bombs so they stood back and waited until the slaughter was over and then went in. Going in like Conan--no. But going in to attempt to stop the killing, you bet.
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.
Police/SWAT at Columbine.
- Thread starter DAL
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
FWIW, about a year ago now, the Denver Post ran a fairly lengthy interview with one of the SWAT team members (it was posted here in full) and asked point blank why they hadn't stormed the school. The reply, equally point blank, was that the SWAT team couldn't hear ANYTHING because of the alarms ringing and water flowing from all of the fire sprinklers. In short, they didn't know at that precise moment what the hell was going down, or where, or what to do. At least that is what the D Post article suggested very strongly a year ago. It might be useful to revisit that very long post.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Sensible post, Erik. Might you reference the professional journal articles you read?
You could e-mail the citation to me.
Thanks so much.
glenn
You could e-mail the citation to me.
Thanks so much.
glenn
I'm pretty much w/ Buzz and Jordan on this one. While I'm not an LEO, I do have two in high school. I'm sure that the on-scene commanders were more afraid of liability than they were of the consequences of inaction. I don't consider myself brave (at all!), but I guaran-flippin'-tee you I'd have entered that building in bermuda shorts and flip-flops, armed with plastic cutlery, if it were my kids' high-school under attack. Bet any of the soccer-moms there would have, too.
Gopher a 45
New member
One quote from the SOF article stuck in my head (paraphrased), "SWAT teams cannot prevent causalties in a situation where the shooter is simply killing people as fast as possible, but with proper training, can reduce the body count."
Now, my follow up is not, "So what the h*ll are they good for?" because I know that such tactics/teams have their time and place (discussed at length elsewhere), but the article's right in that you cannot stop someone who's just killing people as fast as possible, especially if you are not directly in the path of the killer(s) and have confusing intel, which was the case in Columbine. I find it highly disturbing that the national debate has focused entirely on "solutions" that would make absolutely no difference to the outcome of any such future event. Yet, the only answer that would have made a difference that day, arming teachers or other responsible adults, is dismissed as sheer gun-owner insanity by those whose kids are safely cocooned in private schools with the best security money can buy, while the commoners' children just have to take their chances. Something to think about.
[This message has been edited by Gopher a 45 (edited May 09, 2000).]
Now, my follow up is not, "So what the h*ll are they good for?" because I know that such tactics/teams have their time and place (discussed at length elsewhere), but the article's right in that you cannot stop someone who's just killing people as fast as possible, especially if you are not directly in the path of the killer(s) and have confusing intel, which was the case in Columbine. I find it highly disturbing that the national debate has focused entirely on "solutions" that would make absolutely no difference to the outcome of any such future event. Yet, the only answer that would have made a difference that day, arming teachers or other responsible adults, is dismissed as sheer gun-owner insanity by those whose kids are safely cocooned in private schools with the best security money can buy, while the commoners' children just have to take their chances. Something to think about.
[This message has been edited by Gopher a 45 (edited May 09, 2000).]
Either way we look at this situation it was set up to be a loose-loose situation. If the Police do little to nothing (as was the case) they get ripped a new one for standing by and watching kids get killed. If they go in and cause havok, they get a new one ripped for being too agressive and JBT'esque. The way I look at the situation if I am going to get my ass chewed out no matter what happens I would rather have that done cause I acted rather than sat on my thumb. Do I play Quake, no. Do I have too much bravado, maybe.
My after a year assessment is that the COPS on the scene were hindered by beurocracy. Various jurisdictions showing up and then either having a pissing contest or unable to coordinate efforts. Lack of leadership, both from on the scene officers and behind the desk politicians. And lack of initiative (you may say that there were officers there who wanted to go in and help the dying kids, but the fact of the matter is they didn't.)
My personal and unprofessional response to such a threat would have been as follows. Officers have managed to make entry into the building without setting any devices off already, so send in one unit from one jurisdiction to begin clearing the school. Yes I know it is a large complex, but so what. ROE for entry team is standard procedure. If it has a gun and is posing a threat to you, your team members, or the kids it gets shot. We dont seem to have a problem using these same rules during no-knocks so why shoud it be different. If you have team members that cant distinguish between a kid with a gun and one without one, they should be fired and quickly. Second, use the other teams to try to evacuate as many of the ground floor kids through windows as possible. Cant remember if the school had windows or not so this may not have been an option.
My after a year assessment is that the COPS on the scene were hindered by beurocracy. Various jurisdictions showing up and then either having a pissing contest or unable to coordinate efforts. Lack of leadership, both from on the scene officers and behind the desk politicians. And lack of initiative (you may say that there were officers there who wanted to go in and help the dying kids, but the fact of the matter is they didn't.)
My personal and unprofessional response to such a threat would have been as follows. Officers have managed to make entry into the building without setting any devices off already, so send in one unit from one jurisdiction to begin clearing the school. Yes I know it is a large complex, but so what. ROE for entry team is standard procedure. If it has a gun and is posing a threat to you, your team members, or the kids it gets shot. We dont seem to have a problem using these same rules during no-knocks so why shoud it be different. If you have team members that cant distinguish between a kid with a gun and one without one, they should be fired and quickly. Second, use the other teams to try to evacuate as many of the ground floor kids through windows as possible. Cant remember if the school had windows or not so this may not have been an option.
George Hill, et al:
Yeah, I was under the impression that our SWAT teams were trained to exercise an extreme degree of fire control, strictly accountable for for EVERY round that exited their guns, and to exercise *stingy* judgement as to appropriate targets even under stress within a split second. After all, as pbash pointed out, they are not the military and cannot afford ANY collateral losses.
SWAT proponents have campaigned vigorously to convince me of this.
But you guys are right... introducing SWAT teams into the Columbine environment probably *would* have resulted in a "guns blazing" Conan style shoot 'em up blood bath with many innocents unintentionally killed.
What you're saying sounds to me like: Those kids were better off with "only two" gun wielding maniacs roaming the halls... let's not send in dozens more.
[This message has been edited by Jordan (edited May 09, 2000).]
Yeah, I was under the impression that our SWAT teams were trained to exercise an extreme degree of fire control, strictly accountable for for EVERY round that exited their guns, and to exercise *stingy* judgement as to appropriate targets even under stress within a split second. After all, as pbash pointed out, they are not the military and cannot afford ANY collateral losses.
SWAT proponents have campaigned vigorously to convince me of this.
But you guys are right... introducing SWAT teams into the Columbine environment probably *would* have resulted in a "guns blazing" Conan style shoot 'em up blood bath with many innocents unintentionally killed.
What you're saying sounds to me like: Those kids were better off with "only two" gun wielding maniacs roaming the halls... let's not send in dozens more.
[This message has been edited by Jordan (edited May 09, 2000).]
Let's not forget that the courts have ruled that police are peace officers and as such they are charged with restoring order. They are not required to protect or defend anyone. We have the second amendment which allows us to provide for our own protection. Unfortunately, most people buy into the politically correct notion that the police exist for their protection and even worse, many are denied the means to protect themselves by their local governments. As I see it, the police at the Columbine crime scene did the job they were required to do - they contained the disturbance and eventually brought about its termination and the restoration of order. It is understandable, though unrealistic, that we might have wanted them to do more.
I think people are mad/PO/etc that Columbine happened. Some people can't seem to get past there outrage and disbelief that really BAD EVIL things do happen.
All the people who talk about "going in there" are not thinking about the FACTS.
This wasn't an IDPA match with hostile's clearly marked.
The cops don't know the layout of the school, they don't even know all the cops or even all the departments that have responded. So there exists the very real posibility of one good guy shooting another good guy because he sees a weapon! Or even worse starting a firefight.
The fire alarms and sprinklers were going. How many of you have cleared buildings with fire alarms on? I have in security work. The first thing the firefighters always did was have ME lead them to the alarm panel and shut off the alarm so they could cordinate a search for the fire and hear if someone needed help.
Trust me a radio is useless inside a building with fire alarms on. Verbal communication won't work past 2 or 3 yards. And that is without gunfire or sprinklers running.
Since the some unknown number of students were the goblins in this case you would need the manpower to handle and contain ALL of the students or by rescueing a "victum" you might just be letting a goblin out of the perimeter.
What the cops did was correct tactically. YES that means kids were dieing while they waited to do their job correctly. Welcome to the world--it sucks sometimes!
I am not saying the cops on the scene did everything perfectly, because this was the real world. Execution of a plan or tactics is always difficult. It is sometimes easier to go in like "john wayne" and acomplish nothing except for feeling good about your actions, while leaving the people that ARE depending on you with no hope.
All the people who talk about "going in there" are not thinking about the FACTS.
This wasn't an IDPA match with hostile's clearly marked.
The cops don't know the layout of the school, they don't even know all the cops or even all the departments that have responded. So there exists the very real posibility of one good guy shooting another good guy because he sees a weapon! Or even worse starting a firefight.
The fire alarms and sprinklers were going. How many of you have cleared buildings with fire alarms on? I have in security work. The first thing the firefighters always did was have ME lead them to the alarm panel and shut off the alarm so they could cordinate a search for the fire and hear if someone needed help.
Trust me a radio is useless inside a building with fire alarms on. Verbal communication won't work past 2 or 3 yards. And that is without gunfire or sprinklers running.
Since the some unknown number of students were the goblins in this case you would need the manpower to handle and contain ALL of the students or by rescueing a "victum" you might just be letting a goblin out of the perimeter.
What the cops did was correct tactically. YES that means kids were dieing while they waited to do their job correctly. Welcome to the world--it sucks sometimes!
I am not saying the cops on the scene did everything perfectly, because this was the real world. Execution of a plan or tactics is always difficult. It is sometimes easier to go in like "john wayne" and acomplish nothing except for feeling good about your actions, while leaving the people that ARE depending on you with no hope.
I think we'll need to wait for the final report, but even so, I'm sort of surprised by some of the responses here. The police moved so incredibly slowly that they didn't get help to people that they knew were slowly bleeding to death over hours. They knew where these people were and had civilians willing to lead the police to them.
Many of you sound more like anarchists than I even consider myself. If the SWAT truly can't help in such a situation, then perhaps it is time that we disband the police and stop paying their salaries.
It seems to me that it would be possible to move into the building and evacuate students. It is unlikely that a shooter will be able to blend into a crowd of huddling students without being identified by others in the crowd. What am I missing?
It seems SWAT is set up to deal with hostage situations and unfortunately they are unprepared for massacre type scenarios.
Many of you sound more like anarchists than I even consider myself. If the SWAT truly can't help in such a situation, then perhaps it is time that we disband the police and stop paying their salaries.
It seems to me that it would be possible to move into the building and evacuate students. It is unlikely that a shooter will be able to blend into a crowd of huddling students without being identified by others in the crowd. What am I missing?
It seems SWAT is set up to deal with hostage situations and unfortunately they are unprepared for massacre type scenarios.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Glamdring:
Since the some unknown number of students were the goblins in this case you would need the manpower to handle and contain ALL of the students or by rescueing a "victum" you might just be letting a goblin out of the perimeter.[/quote]
Better a goblin in the open and no longer shooting than one inside and still killing people. Other students would have fingered the bad guys for police later.
Since the some unknown number of students were the goblins in this case you would need the manpower to handle and contain ALL of the students or by rescueing a "victum" you might just be letting a goblin out of the perimeter.[/quote]
Better a goblin in the open and no longer shooting than one inside and still killing people. Other students would have fingered the bad guys for police later.
Nyterunner
New member
I can't believe I'm hearing this. I listen to anti-gunners all day long saying shooters are screwed up in the head. I defend gun ownership rights, then come home and read people like JORDAN and the rest proving the anti-gunners' point. Most of you guys should GET OUT OF THE GENE POOL OR GET AN EDUCATION!!!
Police ARE charged with restoring order, but NOT comitting suicide at work by 'charging that machine gun nest'. Some of you guys make sense and I thank you for your opinions. All you guys who say 'the police should be disbanded and we'll just handle everything ourselves' are just as dangerous as the liberals-no, worse. USE SOME COMMON SENSE!!! You want to bash cops 'cause you got a ticket, then tell us why you hate cops. Don't just sit here and talk nonsense.
------------------
I don't CARE about pretty....I just want dangerous.
Police ARE charged with restoring order, but NOT comitting suicide at work by 'charging that machine gun nest'. Some of you guys make sense and I thank you for your opinions. All you guys who say 'the police should be disbanded and we'll just handle everything ourselves' are just as dangerous as the liberals-no, worse. USE SOME COMMON SENSE!!! You want to bash cops 'cause you got a ticket, then tell us why you hate cops. Don't just sit here and talk nonsense.
------------------
I don't CARE about pretty....I just want dangerous.
Destructo6
New member
As far as IDing friendly LEOs, if they're wearing a uniform (old style Police uniform), that's shouldn't be a problem.
If the police aren't responsible for the civilian version of charging a machinegun nest, who is?
If the police aren't responsible for the civilian version of charging a machinegun nest, who is?
George Hill
Staff Alumnus
The MARINES...
Enough of this.
As Lawdog says:
Lights out.
------------------
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
Enough of this.
As Lawdog says:
Lights out.
------------------
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.