What do you do when someone starts shooting? Ignore the anti-gun slant, this is posted for consideration of tactics only. In this case detectives reviewing video had to rule out anyone who had a gun in their hand as a suspect. If police make entry to stop the shooter they will do the same thing as they clear the building.
http://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/02...mart-shooting/
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...103-story.html
"Gunfighting is a thinking man's game. So we might want to bring thinking back into it."-MDFA
Beware of my temper, and the dog that I've found...
It doesn't matter how difficult the investigation is, there is literally no timeline or deadline for many high profile incidents like this and only an idiot reporter with an agenda would make this an issue.
Neither article say if the gunman was shot by a ccw citizen, and frankly once the BS agenda started spewing out then whatever point they were trying to make instantly dissolved.
As an fyi, this is not something which should be a consideration for anyone who carries a pistol. LE response and investigations are not something you should worry about at the time of the event. To suggest anything else is stupid.
Last edited by voodoo_man; 11-05-2017 at 07:24 AM.
VDMSR.com
Chief Developer for V Development Group
Everything I post I do so as a private individual who is not representing any company or organization.
IMO, the notion that "It took more than five hours to identify the suspect" is just lame spin because the "suspect" would be the one with the dead people in front of him.
Spinners are gonna spin, but I think if somebody inferred that they waited five hours to start looking for the guy that committed an obvious crime that person is gonna wish they had not made such a statement.
Tell us how you really feel. Seriously though it does not surprise me about the narrative, the agenda is aniti 2A. What they said is true though. I am sure the investigation would have been easier and faster if they did not have to investigate the additional footage of the law abiding citizens, BUT if the shooter never committed the crime there would have been no need to investigate in the first place.Originally Posted by voodoo_man
I do know people that choose to NOT carry carry because of the potential legal issues and costs that will most likely be involved with the legal use of a firearm. To each his own, however I have the right to decide what I want to do, but that is not going to stop the MSM from trying to change that.
"Avila said it would be hard to quantify how much more quickly the investigation could have proceeded."
""This is a part of the job of police — to investigate what happened, not highlight that patrons were legally armed," he said. "In that situation, what are people supposed to do? Lay down on the floor and draw chalk marks around themselves?""
No offense to any person on this forum that is a cop, EMT, firefighter, or some other form of emergency services; the term "First Responder" is misleading. The true first responders are the ones that are in the middle of whatever action necessitated a call for EMS in the first place. While I certainly don't want to run afoul of the police or receive any special attention from the EMT's, I should hope that those considerations are the last ones on my mind if ever confronted with a similar situation.
From what I can tell, the folks that draw or otherwise present their handguns did exactly the right thing, got themselves and their families to safety rather than haring off looking for the shooter. That's what I see my goals as, to get myself and family to safety, not make the cops' job easier.
Men freely believe that which they desire.
Julius Caesar
Pay attention, I'm not trying to advance any spin.
Second, if you didn't read or hear about this shooting, the gunman killed people and left the store, hence the PD looked at video to get an ID. I have no idea how long it took them to discern which person with a gun was good/bad, and that isn't the point.
Third, people heard gunfire and some drew guns. You may need to do that immediately, or if you're all the way across a 150K square foot building, you may want to hold off. LE will be coming and they will be looking for someone with a gun. My point was to think about what you're doing in such a situation.
"Gunfighting is a thinking man's game. So we might want to bring thinking back into it."-MDFA
Beware of my temper, and the dog that I've found...
Worth reiterating.
As Sun Tzu said: "Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
It depends.
If I'm in there off duty alone I'd advance towards the sounds and try my dangdest to take out the shooter. I'd probably have to pass several other shoppers crouched down on the floor protecting their families with their own pistols. Therefore, to not be mistaken as "the guy", I'd probably have to keep the pistol on me concealed to keep from getting shot down by another shopper mistaking me for "the guy".
If I'm in there with my wife and son, I'm staying put with them after arming up junior with my back up piece. He can outshoot most of the cops I work with and his instructions would be to stay put and not get shot by other shoppers or responding officers. Worst case scenario would be "the guy" comes down our aisle with murder and mayhem on his mind and junior and I burn him down with extreme prejudice.
If I'm in there as a regular Joe with no LE experience, I stay put and draw on the sly with my back up against something solid and stay put. "The guy" comes down my aisle with murder and mayhem on his mind, I burn him down. I don't go looking for him though as other shoppers might confuse me with him.
I've responded to shootings at Walmarts before.........and other innocents having their own pistols didn't slow down a thing. Frankly, I would hope that in my area (heavy 2nd amendment friendly) "the guy" would be gunned down with a quickness by other shoppers but so far in the shootings I've been to that hasn't been the case. Nobody with any awareness of civil/tort law wants to go hunt the killer down because even if they go full John Wick on him and save the day, they know that they just put all their assets on the line when the idiot's family comes out of the woodwork wanting to sue everyone.
I can't fault anyone for wanting to protect what they strived and sweated for.
But laying down in the aisle and waiting to die? No thanks. That's not what the line level officer responding to this sort of call wants either. Matter of fact, the guys I work with just absolutely love it when an intended victim puts extra holes in a felon intent on doing them harm.
If it hinders our investigation a little, it's worth it. Cost of doing business.
In reality, you could probably tell by the video alone who was just an innocent in the store shopping just by their reactions. If we have to spend a few extra minutes watching tapes ruling out "good guys with guns" we'd be totally good with that. Other units would be out hunting the cretin and it would give us something to do with the Loss Prevention guys who would probably be pretty savvy about watching people on CCTV and knowing who has "the look" and who doesn't.
I mean, they got the guy, right? Who cares if it took a little bit of time? So long as he didn't shoot more people in that interim, what difference does it make? They should be thankful there was video to review to firm up who the troops were hunting.
Regards.
Last edited by lwt16; 11-05-2017 at 10:17 AM.
A very well written piece.Some very good points as well
Every situation is unique and fluid. I'm unlikely to pull my gun until I have eyes on a threat to avoid being mistaken for said threat, whether I bunker down, run, or try to intervene. But the situation will dictate. I want to do anything I can to make the medics' and coroner's jobs easier so making the investigators jobs harder is an unfortunate but acceptable side effect.
Reply With Quote