Engaging a Shooter in a Crowded Space

[NH Shooter]

Playing the “what if” game is helpful, up to a point. Have a pre-programmed immediate action plan is always good. The key, IMO, is to not take the autopilot too far into the engagement. The very first thing I’m going to do is to try and identify what’s happening and then my decision tree splits. Am I alone or with family? Am I close to an escapee point or not.....

Yes, absolutely agree.

Without LEO or mil training/experience, us civies have to think this stuff through on our own. I sincerely hope I will never find myself in such a scenario, but there seems no escape from media reports of the same.

Just a bit of BG, our youngest daughter is a RN at Mass Gen Hospital In Boston, she cared for some of the most seriously injured of the Marathon bombing. We lived her awful experience through her text messages and phone calls.

Our oldest daughter lives and works in NYC, on the same block of the most recent terrorist attack of using a truck to run down pedestrians.

There seems no escape so it's difficult for me to not think about this stuff.

[octagon]

I think LSP552 hit the important points of ambiguous,chaotic and unknown situation with each being unique so any intended or expected plan is minimally realistic. If you wish to consider options or possible response as attacking then why not consider attacking from behind rather than from the side. It offers even less visual indication to the attacker to see you even with head turning and peripheral vision and if faced with an attacker with a superior weapon advantage it allows more time and less risk to make a more accurate shot where armor may be less likely. It also could allow for closing range with less likely being noticed. That is if you are looking for a possible option why not look for the best and work your way through alternatives to the worst if you are just "war gaming"

I believe the more likely and maybe more robust pre and during incident thinking is better spent on general practices of avoiding the rules of stupid(don't go to stupid places with stupid people and do stupid things or at stupid times) limit exposure or high value/likelier areas targeted. locate entry and exit points and alternatives. Consider places of cover and concealment and keeping within reasonable distance of places to exit quickly(run) get to cover or concealment(hide) or move to the best position to attack(rear) or second best (sides) if all alternatives have been eliminated. Lastly attempting to use your situation to the best advantage you can while reducing the attackers as much as possible. Such as if you are equipped with a handgun and the attacker with a rifle you have mobility and close range(close to contact and clinch) better ability to attack than a person with a long gun at close/clinch ranges. If you can move, get behind cover or concealment or otherwise avoid being killed or taken out of commission long enough to have the shooter run out of ammo attacking while they reload is an option.

There are just way too many variables to consider any one for much of a possibility. The attacker could come in and back into a corner throwing out multiple options while opening others. War gaming options in discussion is a very early basic to think some things through starting out but doing an active killer training where some multiple role players,bumping and chaotic movement can be experienced at levels well reduced from actual situations. Force on force or 270 degree simulator would be better. None will cover every possibility but most will be better than discussion or broad open ended discussion with no specific environment,situation or other details to consider.

[Lester Polfus]

When I had a patrol district, it included the local high school and one of the local middle schools. I was likely to be johnny on the spot for a bad day.

Obviously blending in while in uniform wasn't really a viable strategy, but here's something that went through my head pretty frequently:

We had it drilled into us to consider our background. We were an urban/suburban police department, so any shooting we were involved in was likely to have innocents down range of the threat, or even between us and the threat. Our in-service trainings frequently featured lots of no shoot cardboard cutout targets interspersed around bad guy targets. There was often a particular spot where you could maneuver and get a clear line of fire.

In an active shooter, you may be compelled to take a shot where there is no "safe backdrop" and may in fact, be consciously taking a shot that endangers people behind the shooter because it's less harmful overall than running around trying to find a perfect angle that doesn't exists while he mag dumps into the crowd.

That's a shit sandwich.

[Irelander]

When I had a patrol district, it included the local high school and one of the local middle schools. I was likely to be johnny on the spot for a bad day.

Obviously blending in while in uniform wasn't really a viable strategy, but here's something that went through my head pretty frequently:

We had it drilled into us to consider our background. We were an urban/suburban police department, so any shooting we were involved in was likely to have innocents down range of the threat, or even between us and the threat. Our in-service trainings frequently featured lots of no shoot cardboard cutout targets interspersed around bad guy targets. There was often a particular spot where you could maneuver and get a clear line of fire.

In an active shooter, you may be compelled to take a shot where there is no "safe backdrop" and may in fact, be consciously taking a shot that endangers people behind the shooter because it's less harmful overall than running around trying to find a perfect angle that doesn't exists while he mag dumps into the crowd.

That's a #### sandwich.

That is what I was thinking. I have been thinking about this a lot lately for church security planning. The bottom line is that, if engaging the killer with pistol in a crowded environment, we had better have the skills through training of surgical precision shots at various distances. That innocent between you and the killer, or behind him just might be a family member.

[Chance]

Panic and chaos ensues, people are running in all directions for their lives.

I'm going to start by challenging this assumption. I've read a number of case studies (links below), and have seen a handful of video that suggest when something goes horribly wrong, plenty of people will take no action at all unless explicitly directed otherwise. I've seen that with regards to shootings as well as other calamities.

The Unthinkable and Extreme Fear are two excellent reads in this area. I'll take this opportunity to plug a thread of other such books.

[Coyotesfan97]

When I had a patrol district, it included the local high school and one of the local middle schools. I was likely to be johnny on the spot for a bad day.

Obviously blending in while in uniform wasn't really a viable strategy, but here's something that went through my head pretty frequently:

We had it drilled into us to consider our background. We were an urban/suburban police department, so any shooting we were involved in was likely to have innocents down range of the threat, or even between us and the threat. Our in-service trainings frequently featured lots of no shoot cardboard cutout targets interspersed around bad guy targets. There was often a particular spot where you could maneuver and get a clear line of fire.

In an active shooter, you may be compelled to take a shot where there is no "safe backdrop" and may in fact, be consciously taking a shot that endangers people behind the shooter because it's less harmful overall than running around trying to find a perfect angle that doesn't exists while he mag dumps into the crowd.

That's a shit sandwich.

Sometimes the body of the target is/has to be an acceptable backstop. You just have to make the shot. No pressure...

[LSP552]

Sometimes the body of the target is/has to be an acceptable backstop. You just have to make the shot. No pressure...

I’m way more comfortable dealing with a pass through injury to someone that a miss that hits. There is no way that a shot that misses and kills the wrong person won’t see you bankrupt at best and in jail at worst. Speaking as a civilian without any legal duty to intervene.

That’s something that anyone contemplating taking that shot better understand.

[JohnO]

Sometimes the body of the target is/has to be an acceptable backstop. You just have to make the shot. No pressure...

Depending upon the circumstances changing the angle of the shot can mitigate a problem with pass through. e.g. Taking a knee and making a head shot on an upward trajectory. Obviously you need to be close for the slope of the shot to be of significant value. Nonetheless a worthwhile technique to have in the toolbox.

[NH Shooter]

I'm going to start by challenging this assumption. I've read a number of case studies (links below), and have seen a handful of video that suggest when something goes horribly wrong, plenty of people will take no action at all unless explicitly directed otherwise.

Good info, the kind I was hoping for.

In that case "blending in" may be more difficult while trying to set up a shot. I still have to believe that being able to do so under the cover of chaos is the best chance of success.

[Beat Trash]

Do you have a clear shot? Even though the suspect is not concerned about collateral damage, we must be.

There are a few things that one can do to assist in getting a clear shot. Taking a knee, thereby changing the angle of your shot so that a through and through goes into the ceiling and not into the mother directly behind the suspect that is holding her infant. Moving laterally until you're clear. A lot goes through a person's mind during a real incident. That's one of the reasons why there's so much more involved than just basic marksmanship ability on a square range to be successful. Both during the incident and surviving the aftermath of the incident. LEO's as a group must be constantly aware of this thought. When I came on the job 25 years ago it was preached to do what you must, and worse case, you're covered under implied immunity. Well folks, implied immunity went out the window the minute it became fashionable to indite officers for murder. If you're a CCW private citizen, then implied immunity was never on the table for you to begin with.

FATS type training and SIMS type force on force training are excellent tools. Both are very educational and humbling. I'm fortunate to work at an agency that is not shy about using SIMS training for the non-swat masses. If you ever have the opportunity to train with either, I recommend doing so.

Planning out how to address an incident before it ever happens is a good mental excursive. But also remember to plan for the fact that your incident, should you ever be involved in one, will never go as planned...