Ending an active shooter encounter

I’ve been asked to put a training guide together on the use of deadly force in stopping active shooters as part of a presentation to school boards as they consider various programs for dealing with the threat of active shooters.

In reviewing incidents over the last couple of years in the state I came across this one.

In what easily could have escalated to a “mass shooting” the shooter was engaged in seconds with the predictable result, no more casualties.

1 Like

Great. A gunfight in a bar. People carrying firearms in a bar. What could possibly go wrong?

Go with that on your school board presentation.

There was no “gunfight”.

There was also no mass shooting.

The location is irrelevant, the results are the same. When engaged in under a minute the casualties are reduced usually by over 90% vs shootings in which the victims have to wait on police to arrive minutes later.

Over 95% of school shootings are over in 3-4 minutes.

lol - So a guy carrying a gun got into an argument and pulled it out and shot a guy…

Another guy with a gun then pulls his gun and shoots him.

And the moral we’re supposed to come away with is it’s a darn good thing the second guy had a gun and not that it’s a shame the first guy had a gun. :rofl:

Here’s another guy that had a gun on him.

I don’t particularly care what you think about lawful carry, the fact remains that if you want to keep casualties to a minimum in an active shooter situation it’s absolutely essential they are engaged immediately, not minutes later after police can arrive, assess the situation, come up with a plan of action, and move to interdict the shooter.

The average police response time to a shooting is over 5 minutes in the US and that’s from the time the call is completed.

Over 95% of school shootings are over in 5 minutes or less from the time the first shot is fired and over 90% of the casualties will occur in the first 3 minutes.

As for your example, had he been engaged in the same timely manner the math tells us there would have been no more than 2 dead including himself and most likely no other casualties at all.

There is no possible way on earth to keep the hands out of would be active or mass shooters but we do know the most effective ways of stopping them once they begin.

The fact remains that if you want to see an increase in rage shootings just get more and more guns out into the public just like the guy from the story you love so much that was just arguing with the manager before deciding to shoot him and the Madden player.

Spin all you like Cowboy, thems the facts.

There’s nothing factual in this post or anything other you’ve stated on the subject.

There has been no such increase in “rage shootings” in the state since we began liberalizing our carry laws.

What we have done during that period however is cut our overall violent crime rate by more than half.

You have no idea if the murderer in this case was even legally in possession of the gun he used.

What we do know for a fact though is that the guy who stopped him was and acted in a completely lawful and appropriate manner in killing the criminal.

https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2018/08/27/640323347/the-school-shootings-that-werent

As if marketing to parents in schools wasn’t bad enough…

What does any of this have to do with ending active shooter encounters?

You might want to read your own sources.

The ED uses reports from the schools to count the number of incidents. If the schools fail to report accurately as they did for the 2015-2016 school year there’s no way the ED is going to have accurate numbers to report.

Dodge much?

It’s no secret that DeVos wants to use federal money to purchase firearms and training for teachers. LIES like the report the DOE produced are part of the build up for the “crisis” in schools. Or I think you called it, the threat of active shooters

If the DOE, under Devos and the Trump administration is so incompetent that they are either incapable or uneducated enough to verify that data from 240 freakin schools, then we have bigger problems… Calling 240 schools should take on e staffer less that a week…

I’m not dodging anything. This has nothing to do with what’s being discussed here whatsoever, it’s just your attempt to derail the thread.

The reports were filed for the 2015-16 school year during 2016 and compiled under the previous administration.

If this administration had a reason to misrepresent anything it would be to grossly under report the number of school shootings so as to help deflect from the “more gun control” arguments.

On the other-hand it is the left that benefits from the perception that school shootings are at epidemic levels and have been making fraudulent claims about their frequency for over a decade, labeling as “school shootings” numerous events that didn’t even occur on campus or occurred on school properties but didn’t involve anyone associated with the schools at all.

If you want to wine about this report go start your own thread and quit derailing this one.

The DATA was filed in 2016. The USER of DATA is responsible for VERIFYING DATA when they create a report… Your defense of what is OBVIOUS is amusing…

LOL

You can’t show anything I have stated here to be inaccurate.

Quit derailing this thread.

What does your article about a shooting in a bar have to do with “stopping active shooters as part of a presentation to school boards as they consider various programs for dealing with the threat of active shooters.”

Do you consider bars and schools equivalent environments?

An “active shooter” is an “active shooter” irrespective of the location of the shooting.

LMAO

Are you part of the contingent that approached the DoE about using these funds for training?

At the request of officials in Texas, DeVos and her staff are considering an idea that a grant program under the Every Student Succeeds Act could be used by school districts to pay for firearms and firearms training for school-based staff.

If you are coming to gorge on the trough of public money, expect to be challenged… :heart_eyes:

1 Like

Sadly as usual it’s simply impossible to engage you in a discussion of fact.

At least you remain predictable and consistent.

This will work well when everyone at an Alabama/Auburn football game is armed.

What “fact” is impossible to discuss?

Is the DoE under DeVos considering allowing diverting funds from the Every Student Succeeds Act to be used for firearms and firearms training, which you happen to be creating a presentation to encourage schools boards to approve?

Did the DoE, under DeVos and the Trump administration publish a report with a widely inaccurate count of the number of school shooting incidents? (I would bet that number is on a slide in bunch of these presentation being created for school boards… :joy:)

Read for comprehension. The first shooter shouldn’t have had a gun. He didn’t have a CCW permit. It’s a bad thing he did have a gun, both because of the legalities and more importantly his actions. The second shooter did have a CCW permit, and it’s a good thing he did. Basically speaking, if Texas hadn’t in 1995 made it possible to carry a concealed handgun legally, the first guy would have had a gun, but the second guy (aka the good guy) wouldn’t have.