Revisiting an article written by the newest staff member, Chuck Haggard...

[NH Shooter]

Chuck, thanks for sharing the two active shooter situations that you have experienced. That kind of information helps us civvies get an accurate glimpse into scenarios that we are highly unlikely to ever have to face ourselves.

In the article, several times you mention armed civilians along with the first responding PO as people who might engage an active shooter. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on what the POs you know would think of an armed civilian engaging as opposed to simply leaving the scene if they had the opportunity to do so. I believe this is something all armed civilians ponder - do you simply "get out of Dodge" if the opportunity to safely do so presents itself, or in the absence of any LE who have not yet arrived engage the shooter?

I know there are many moral/legal facets to such a decision, including the ramifications of hitting an innocent while attempting to stop a slaughter. While POs are expected to engage in order to uphold their oath to protect, I can easily envision some consternation in the minds of LE (and certainly the DA) to a civilian who engaged when they were not directly under fire and/or had the opportunity to flee to safety (regardless of the outcome of such engagement).

My sincere thanks for your time and consideration on this not-so-easy-to-answer question.

[Hambo]

"We as law enforcement officers need to have a clear idea of what the hierarchy of safety needs really is. Officer safety is NOT our first concern, if it were we would either hide out at the police station all day or, better yet, just stay home and not go to work. Police work is not about risk avoidance, it is about risk mitigation while also doing the job we have sworn to do. The hierarchy of needs is, and has always been, that the people we protect come first. We place ourselves in the line of fire to protect the citizens we serve, thus the victims of any crime and the bystanders on scene are the first and second priority of any police response. The safety of the officer is almost always the third place consideration."

These are the first words recruits should hear in the academy. Hell, they should have to memorize it to graduate.

[Chuck Haggard]

NH, a CCW person, or off-duty copper, or plain clothes/detective, are all going to have to weigh the risk vs reward of moving to the guns vs getting out of Dodge.

In scenario training at my job we at first found that even fully uniformed officers were gunned down by the designated responders for the scenario when we interjected an "SRO" downrange of the team responding. And I mean they were shot every single time. We worked hard to get our people to PID instead of seeing a gun and starting to shoot. I have no idea how many agencies have undertaken similar training, but I bet it's few and far between.

If you hear shooting nearby, move to contact, see a guy with a gun, is he another CCW dude, the shooter, an off-duty cop, a narc,........?

Years ago I was dispatched to a gunshot call and ended up almost killing one of our off-duty officers who decided to go check things out after being in the area and hearing the shots. Instead of dropping his gun he wanted to argue with me off the end of my shotgun.
Several lessons to be learned form that simple incident.

This is where I see the idea of a "car gun", a carbine that folks keep in the car so that they can go grab it and come back to the fight, as utter insanity. If you are downrange when the cops roll in and you are running around with a long gun then you are damn near 100% likely to be burned down by the first cops that lay eyes on you. Right or wrong, it's a fact of life. You may have the right of way as a pedestrian, but if you step out in front of a fast moving dump truck it just won't matter.

If I was with my family and I was average CCW dude then I'd be working to exit as quickly as possible if I heard multiple gunshots coming from somewhere in my area but I wasn't in visual contact with the event.

If I could clearly see a shooter working over a crowd of people then I would engage if possible (am I all the way across the food court armed with an LCP?....).

If I couldn't get out of the building (assuming indoors such as a mall and such) I would bunker up behind the best cover I could get and wait for the shooters to go away or ambush them if they came into my field of fire.

[KeeFus]

These are the first words recruits should hear in the academy. Hell, they should have to memorize it to graduate.

I agree...

I stopped by out local BLET program (police academy) last week and spoke to a few of the cadets. I was not impressed.

My agency is eyeballing a dude that looks & acts sheepish as hell. Formula for disaster if you ask me. Last cadet we hired that acted like that couldn't pass FTO...and he went through FTO twice...seriously.

[NH Shooter]

Chuck, thanks! I can only imagine how chaotic such an event must be and if caught in one, I certainly wouldn't want to muck-up the works even more by being sighted with a gun in my hand.

You confirmed my thinking: unless (1) I or a loved one are being targeted directly or (2) am offered the opportunity to draw and take a clean, high probability shot, I'm going to do everything possible to stay out of the shooter's sights.

Thanks again for the response, much appreciated!

[KevinB]

Chuck, thanks! I can only imagine how chaotic such an event must be and if caught in one, I certainly wouldn't want to muck-up the works even more by being sighted with a gun in my hand.

You confirmed my thinking: unless (1) I or a loved one are being targeted directly or (2) am offered the opportunity to draw and take a clean, high probability shot, I'm going to do everything possible to stay out of the shooter's sights.

Thanks again for the response, much appreciated!

It's perfect advice.
As Chuck said uniformed LE get killed in Blue on Blue -- the Boston Bombing had quite a number of blue on blue woundings. Just think of what could happen when there is no uniform.

There are things I will do myself, that I would not do if I was with my family - but all involved holstering, going prone and holding my creds as high as I can as soon as I see/hear a uniformed responder.

Depending on numbers etc joining the uniformed LEO's could be an option - however that depends on their feelings - as well as the general situation.

Statistically unless it is a dedicated 2%'er if you return effective fire the suspect is probably going to stay away from you as best as they can - and at that point any CCW should be holstering and moving out if they can.

[LSP552]

I spent a number of years working plainclothes anti-crime details in New Orleans during Mardi Gras. Roaming in undercover packs looking for criminals in a target rich environment is about the most fun you can have with your clothes on. However, getting thumped or worse by the Real (uniform) police was always a primary concern. One person in the group had the primary responsibility to look for uniforms, wave the badge and yell police as loud as he could. His attention was strictly focused away from the immediate problem and always on establishing identity for the responding uniforms. He didn't cuff, fight or anything else but look for uniforms. More than once, we came close to catching a hickory shampoo from uniforms (knowing plainclothes were working in the area) who saw a fight instead of an arrest in progress.

The bottom line is it you don't have a uniform on, you are another potential target.

As a CCW, off-duty officer or detective, you really can't watch for responding uniforms and effectively deal with a threat to your front. There may be times when the situation just sucks or you have no other choice, but you need to understand the danger.

[SeriousStudent]

My thanks to the OP for starting an excellent thread. I especially appreciate all the valuable advice from the LEO's.

[John Hearne]

are the first words recruits should hear in the academy. Hell, they should have to memorize it to graduate.

Doing my part, now enshrined on the wall of inspirational wisdom:

[BWT]

Awesome discussion and I'm glad I was able to read it.

I think you're in a very precarious situation presenting a firearm to defend against a active shooter as far as LE response. For instance, a guy shoots people at random in a mall; you're there and respond. Well, everyone has cell phones these days so they get a description of "a man with a gun". If you're not near that shooter, you do expose yourself to high risk being in that area, matching that description.

I liked reading the content here because as just who I am; I'd struggle in that circumstance on what to do. Do I go towards shooting if moments could save lives or do I break away? I'm thinking that answer like Kevin B's would vary on who I had with me and the other factor of the proximity of myself to the shooter.

These are things I need to reconcile within myself. That being said, thank you Chuck for all that you do. I know you certainly didn't highlight yourself or relay those stories (years ago now) to receive praise. However, that doesn't change that they are praise worthy. Thanks to all Law Enforcement for the way you decisively put yourself into harm's way day in and day out.

I love being a part of this forum.