I prefer the ALERRT Center's interpretation of Avoid / Deny / Defend.Abraham wrote:"Run or hide could be like deescalation."
Deescalation?
I'm not fully understanding, but if you mean fewer targets because people simply aren't seen or there to be shot, I guess I understand what you mean, but find the word more appropriate when I'm the actor in a potential altercation I can halt by being mature, if you will...
When a crazed gun man is mowing down innocent people, somehow the word "deescalation" doesn't come to mind.
Fighting back/Self Defense are words that come to mind and I'm not going to concern myself with "deescalation" when a mad man is on the loose...
From a strictly personal survival standpoint for persons not armed with firearms, this is how the options line up in view of lessons learned from past incidents:
Avoidance - not being where the shooting is taking place - is the most successful survival tactic.
Denial - (sheltering with barriers between you and the shooter) is the next most successful survival tactic.
Active defense is the only remaining viable survival tactic when the other two aren't available and is only effective within touching distance of the adversary. It may be available when the other two are as well, but from a strictly survival likelihood standpoint, the other two carry less risk and from that perspective are better choices.
Persons armed with firearms have the full range of options available to them. Avoidance and denial are still personally safer when available, but a firearms counterattack done with surprise from a position of cover and at an engagement range within the effective range of the defender's weapon and the shot placement ability of the defender is very likely to be successful from both a personal survival standpoint, and from the standpoint of saving other lives as well.
