Gunfire during Dark Night Rises

[Charles L. Cotton]

As more witnesses are being interviewed by the media we learn more about what happened. Apparently, there was no military style sweep from the exit door through the theater in one motion. He apparently fired the shotgun until it was empty and then switched to the AR. There was a lull in the action at that time, but the duration is unknown. There was a lull of several seconds while he tried to clear the AR when it jammed. I've seen three people interviewed who stated the shooter would stop in the isle and talk to/threaten people, even pulling them out of their seats and grabbing them by the hair. Then he shot them. During these times, he was vulnerable. If he’s close enough to touch me, he’s close enough for me to shoot him squarely in his unprotected face. As the Navy Seal in the linked article mentioned, there are almost always opportunities. His helmet was a vision barrier and if he really was wearing a gas mask, that destroyed his peripheral vision. I say "if" because I've heard some interviews that cast doubt on whether or how long he wore a mask.

The crowd was panicked which means the shooter didn't have control of the scene. This can work to a defender's benefit because the shooter cannot keep an eye on everyone in every direction. (Apparently he didn't care about doing so, if he stopped to threaten people individually and put his hands on them.) From the descriptions available, it certainly doesn't appear that he had every person in the crowd in front of like a drover riding drag.

KHOU Ch. 11 TV in Houston interviewed a retired FBI agent now working as a security consultant in the private sector. When he first came on the air, I thought "here we go with the anti-gun, do-nothing speech" but boy was I wrong! He was reserved in his comments, but the message was clear. With no way to escape or barricade against a dedicated shooter, would-be victims must act, react, do something because no one is going to rescue you. He made it clear that the reaction needs to be an immediate and violent response to the threat. Again, these are not quotes, but that was the message.

Passengers' response to the 9/11 hijackers have been discussed, including the difference with the folks on flight 93. It wasn't courage that made the difference in the reactions of the passengers on flight 93, it was knowledge. They knew from cell phone conversations with loved ones that this was not an "ordinary" hijacking and they were not going to be rescued. Their future was in their own hands. They made the decision to save themselves or die trying and by their death, save countless others. Armed with the knowledge gained on 9/11, airline passengers know they must act to save themselves and they have successfully taken action against terrorists and threatening passengers (and even one pilot). The passengers on a Southwest Airlines flight killed a passenger who was trying to open a door while in flight.

Unlike the passengers on flight 93 who didn't gain critical knowledge until they were in the midst of a deadly threat, we have known for years that dedicated shooters (or "active shooters" if you want to use the current, less descriptive term) rely upon 1) slow response by law enforcement (if any); and 2) a timid, sheep-like response from their victims. Law enforcement ranking officers and elected officials need to be honest with the public and tell them exactly what the retired FBI agent stated on his TV interview. React swiftly and violently as a group. Some will probably die, but the body count will be greatly reduced. Perhaps more importantly, people who want to massacre the innocent will come to realize that they would not standing before a herd of sheep, but cattle who will most certainly trample them to save themselves and others.

I want to acknowledge that my opinions are based upon my training and experience, as well as my age. I’m 62 years old with grown children who are quite capable of raising my grandchildren and I have plenty of life insurance to take care of my wife if I die. I also realize that some people run to the sound of gunfire while some run away. The former are not foolhardy and the latter are not cowards; it's just the way we are wired. But dedicated shooters in confined settings with the potential for mass casualties, while rare, present a unique situation where the flight response so natural for some is simply not a viable option.

Chas.

[arod757]

Thank god it wasn't NYC. Then some bystander trying to help would only have been able to throw a smaller cup of soft drink in his face.

[AlphaWhiskey]

I had a lengthy post on the 9/11 comparison but Charles beat me to it (far more succinctly I might add!). The LE training for how to deal with an active shooter has changed since Columbine, VT and others. It does say to actively and immediately engage the threat. Civilians fortunate enough to receive training in these situations are now told to try and hide, escape if possible, but to strike out using any means at hand if cornered by a gunman due to the imminent risk of injury or death. As the details unfold we will learn more about the police response/ timing question. There will be lessons learned from this senseless mass killing in Aurora, CO to add to our tactical tool boxes. The real tragedy will be if we do not take the time to learn them.

Scenario training is good, even if only mental. We can all try and imagine what we will do in this situation or that. The reality is that you only know what you will truly do when the situation is upon you, when you find yourself on the X. In that time, as your OODA loop is spinning up, some critical things will matter when you get to that second O and the D- What is your training? What is conventional wisdom (see Charles' post re: consultants advice)? What is your position relative to the bad guy? How about the nearest exit? Do you have family members with you? Can you get a clear shot, or do you have the tactical advantage to try some sort of a take down? Only the individual situation will dictate what action to take and the perspective will be different for every person involved.

I have been involved in a deadly force encounter. I acted pretty much as I thought I would have. I have been on the X personally, and the only thing I know for sure is that the only way to know what I will do next time is to find myself there again. I hope and pray that day never comes, for me and for all of you, but I do not fear it. Just a little perspective on the "what if".

[JJVP]

Outrage is not an argument - Townhall Article

http://townhall.com/columnists/jacobsul ... page/full/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RPB]

Outrage is not an argument - Townhall Article

http://townhall.com/columnists/jacobsul ... page/full/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks
interesting comments following that article too; many intelligent ones.

[JJVP]

An officer's response to Bloombergs comment for police to go on strike.

http://www.officer.com/blog/10746111/re ... -bloomberg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Jim Beaux]

I have been involved in a deadly force encounter. I acted pretty much as I thought I would have. I have been on the X personally, and the only thing I know for sure is that the only way to know what I will do next time is to find myself there again. I hope and pray that day never comes, for me and for all of you, but I do not fear it. Just a little perspective on the "what if".

So right you are. When I was younger I worked 10 years for a refinery in the 70's. During this time we didnt have the safety protocols and often we had to contend with disasters that killed many. Some may remember the tragedies at Texaco Refinery in Port Arthur & the ones at Mobil Oil in Beaumont; but what you probably dont know is the potential disasters that we were able to head off.

I worked at one the above refineries and was on the X more than once; I also witnessed how my co-workers responded during their time on the X. We reacted respectfully a few times, and sometimes we didnt....and guys, I still cant tell you how I will react the next time if I am on the X, nor can I depend on how my then co-workers will.

There was extensive news coverage and communication black outs when I was involved in one of the explosions and fire. There was vague reports on the number of injuries and deaths. I didnt get home for a long time and when I did, I saw just how terribly my wife suffered just at the thought of me not ever coming home. I realized then that I have a responsibility to her; my risks where her risks. I doubt if either one of us could survive for long without the other.

With this in mind I have questions: My first and foremost priority is my wife's safety. If she and I were down and behind a row of seats & presumably away from the action, could I leave her unprotected to advance on the shooter? What about the danger of drawing the shooters attention to the location where my wife is that I leave to advance?

A few random observations on this shooting. Most of the people's movements were severely restricted as they couldnt move but in two directions, X or Y...few could move diagonally or had an opportunity to advance directly to the shooter because of the seats & the panicked people. Im sure I couldnt get my big carcass over the first row of seats without drawing attention & I would probably look like one of the ducks at a carnival shooting gallery if I tried walking between the row of seats, stumbling and slipping on bodies and blood.

I can only conclude that only a select few could be in a position to effectively and responsibly engage this guy; anything else could be drawing attention to some who may have been safe; and that's gambling.

[Songbird]

Anyone heard about the OTHER Aurora shooting? Of course not.
http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/ ... er-ignored" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[03Lightningrocks]

An officer's response to Bloombergs comment for police to go on strike.

http://www.officer.com/blog/10746111/re ... -bloomberg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for an excellent read!!!

[BritOnTour]

Movie massacre suspect sent chilling notebook to psychiatrist before attack

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/25/ex ... at%20Sheet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regardless of whether the package was delivered before the Friday massacre, this discovery shows the detailed planning that went into the act. it also highlights the intent that he had long before the act was committed. Truly a sick minded person!

[smoothoperator]

Maybe there was not an appropriate moment or situation for those that wanted to - to do so. I will not disparage anyone in that horrible event, but allow me to point out some heroes.

I wonder if the married guy who died protecting his girlfriend had good life insurance for his wife and their two kids.

[jmorris]

TAM. Eloquent and on point as always.

Yeah, he really should have a blog or something.

Well thanks guys but if I had a blog I wouldn't be able to waste so much time here.

BTW, the largest part of the day is gone, and they still have not okayed my post for publication. Intellectual rigor and moral courage are plainly lacking at the Ebert compound.

It's up now.

[Slowplay]

Has it been confirmed that the shooter did in fact have body armor? I've heard tactical vest mentioned during press conferences, but haven't heard law enforcement state that body armor was worn. Anybody have a link of where body armor was confirmed by officials in CO?

[Dave2]

Has it been confirmed that the shooter did in fact have body armor? I've heard tactical vest mentioned during press conferences, but haven't heard law enforcement state that body armor was worn. Anybody have a link of where body armor was confirmed by officials in CO?

It's been confirmed that he was wearing a "tactical vest" (velcro & pockets & sometimes armor pockets), but not actual body armor.

[Beiruty]

Has it been confirmed that the shooter did in fact have body armor? I've heard tactical vest mentioned during press conferences, but haven't heard law enforcement state that body armor was worn. Anybody have a link of where body armor was confirmed by officials in CO?

It's been confirmed that he was wearing a "tactical vest" (velcro & pockets & sometimes armor pockets), but not actual body armor.

Some vests have body armor plate carrier, maybe it would look like this one:



All items would be exhibited as evidence.