Concealed Carry in the Era of Terror

[Kyle Reese]

An eloquent piece by John Murphy of FPF Training.

Here's Part Two.

[Chuck Haggard]

I like that he is hitting on stuff that I have been teaching for years in my active-shooter classes, makes me look smart

[LittleLebowski]

John is a member of our community and I recommend his training whole heartedly.

[Irelander]

I have been thinking about this a lot lately as new atrocities unfold everyday by Islamic terrorists. I can see this happening in sleepy America. Thanks for posting. I know of several people that need to read this. The "that could never happen here" crowd.

I need to figure out how to conceal more reloads.

[RoyGBiv]

An eloquent piece by John Murphy of FPF Training.

Here's Part Two.

Good stuff. Crossposted elsewhere. Thanks.

ISIS Camp a Few Miles from Texas, Mexican Authorities Confirm

[Peally]

It'll happen eventually, and it likely won't change many people's minds that aren't directly affected.

[jh9]

The article mentions Garissa University shooting. We had a shooting on my campus (what still seems like) recently, and according to the report the first shots were fired at 3:59 PM. I left my office next door at 4:01 completely oblivious to the incident and the parking lot was already full. At least 30 police cruisers and one ambulance. I realize not all responses are that punctual, but in this case I would be more worried about getting shot as one of the mistaken gunmen than a prolonged exchange of gunfire with dedicated terrorists.

Granted, this is post-Columbine US and not Mumbai or India. That said, we are not a large city by any stretch of the imagination (180k population in the city).

With regards to AK pickups, two things come to mind:

1) I hate open carry of rifles even more than I did, if that were possible

2) I would expect to be shot by first responders (see above)

This seems like something that would really need to take into account local LE.

There are some (especially more rural) departments that I simply wouldn't expect a good showing from. They don't have the manpower or resources to present like our (armed) campus police, city police and sheriff's department did. (That isn't a criticism of the individual officers in any way. Just an observation of the resources they have available.)

Meanwhile, there are others that I would absolutely content to let them handle it because I'd hate to be an oopsie for one of the first guys on the scene. Who, in my case, were there before I had any idea there was a problem.

Not trying to contradict the author. Just bringing up a point I think is worth considering.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Excellent article.

The problem is the push back to such preparedness (from employers, academic institutions, etc.):

1. Denial it will happen on the grounds of low probability of an event and/or the anxiety thinking about it would produce.
2. Political opposition:
a. hatred of guns and gun owners who might like political parties not popular in academic for instance
b. installing a fear of ethnic groups who might be terrorist and thus promoting discrimination
3. Liability fear - the institution is less liable from harm caused by terrorist than by harm caused an employee who does something bad (shooting an innocent). That's why some places won't train folks in first aid.
4. A psychological bias that says the risk of harming an innocent is more salient than the harm caused by the evil doer.
5. Opposition by some police (campus types, higher ups) - they don't want the risk of shooting an innocent or getting shot by a civilian defender who screws up. Being the only armed folk gives more control of the situation, even though it might cause more causalities.

Push back from 'gun folk'

- I already know how to shoot so I don't want to train. Thus, if some training is required to be an allowed defender, that's an insult to my warrior-ness. Also, it is unconstitutional.
- I don't carry but I have a car gun, so what do you mean I can't get it and run into battle?
- Run 200 yards - no comment with my knees.

Thanks for the links.

[JustOneGun]

A good article and some good ideas on not getting killed by the 1st responders. I tell people that an active shooter response by police is the closest thing to a seek and destroy mission that they will ever be on. You should not be holding a weapon when they encounter you. The chances of you being engaged with bullets is quite high.

Some random ideas about this type of event that I don't see talked about much in training.

As a civilian or off duty officer, decide now, if you are going to engage a terrorist/active shooter or move away. There is a very big difference on how and what you train depending on the answer.

I try not to go to large public venues such as malls, Wal-Mart, theaters and such. I used to be a people person but people ruined it for me.
If me and my family do go, I make a point of staying together. If that means I have to go bra shopping and she has to go look at hiking equipment, so be it. I don't like the chance of success in trying to find my wife during an active shooting. I just want to move away from the problem, not wade through it. It's amazing how seemingly innocent ideas like how you shop as a couple or family can mean the difference of life and death when something bad happens. I believe this is the real definition of plan ahead.

Shooting 50+ yards across a chaotic mall isn't just about missing and hitting someone down range. It's also about hitting someone who dynamically moves between you and the target while you are in the throws of tunnel vision. How will you deal with this?

Now my mini rant: Terrorism is a national problem. It is about national policy of foreign, military, immigration affairs, etc. Often those problems coming to this country were brought on and allowed by our government and the ding-a-lings that elect them. I have no illusions that anything I do at a mall will effect that in any way (even if against all odds it all goes right and I am a hero). I did my time helping people as an officer. I did my best and was usually pretty good. Now retired and as I get older my level of training is dropping off, I'm going to tactically retreat. As a civilian that means in a controlled manner to run like hell with the only plan to shoot anyone is if they are in the way of me and the only exit.

No matter what your decision is on that last topic, it should not be made lightly. It will be hard for me to move away from such a problem. For my own personal reasons I made a plan and I will be sticking to it. IMHO so should you.

[TGS]

Question for the LE here:

BaiHu and I were instructed by a retired DoD 1811/LE firearms instructor that we should use the SUL as a default stance in a shooting situation, as it is universally recognized as a "good guy" type of thing to do.....and thus, it helps our chances of not being smoked by LE upon their arrival.

Honestly, it sounds credible to me. SUL is a very specific technique that I think LE would be less likely to shoot at someone if they're using it. I would still expect to be detained until my ID/intents are verified....but, what do you guys think? Hokey pokey or a good idea?

I know that Chuck and Darryl have written before about how crucial being identified as a good guy is in these circumstances (raid jacket vs plainclothes with a badge on the belt, ect), so I wanted to ask.