Possibly. In the private sector I have worked many a business type including stores. Stores generally have lots of concealment - and very little cover. I worked an overnight pharmacy chain contract for several years; I was happiest when they would stack pallet loads of water or other beverages in or near the center walkway. I would spend most of the night standing behind it facing the entrance. And if anything happened inside I could generally move around it like a parked car.
Prioities
- Thread starter hdwhit
- Start date
-
- Tags
- active shooter
- Status
Hanzo581
Member
As far as retreating into a store, I feel this video is relevant. It's a tough one to watch, but a lot of lessons learned.
9MMare
Member
For all the OP's very numerous bullet points, there's nothing provided that says I must shoot...if I have an escape route with my loved one, or good cover...I wouldnt. Not until my loved one was out of harm's way and then, only if I felt I could actually, safely, stop the shooter.
9MMare
Member
The title of the thread is 'Priorities.' My *first* priority would be my loved one and my own safety. After that is achieved, then other responses may be considered.
9MMare
Member
Too prescriptive and rigid...assumes others' behavior. As some in the thread posted...we wouldnt shoot under the circumstances outlined in the preceding 'bulleted' actions in the list.
So if I shouldnt have responded...noted.
9MMare
Member
MedWheeler
Member
The problem with asking us to assume we have already engaged the shooter is that many of us are in the mindset that we would seek other options first, such as extraction of ourselves and company. So, having us in a scenario in which we have already acted against our own thought plan makes it difficult to answer accurately.
Of course, the original inquiry could have been worded differently, into a scenario in which the respondent was cornered already, in such close proximity to the enemy, that immediate engagement was an appropriate response. Many of the responses given, including mine, would still fit.
Of course, the original inquiry could have been worded differently, into a scenario in which the respondent was cornered already, in such close proximity to the enemy, that immediate engagement was an appropriate response. Many of the responses given, including mine, would still fit.
badkarmamib
Member
True, but, the OP was worded that we have already engaged. No matter what else we would have done first, we should assume that those options didn't or couldn't work, and we were left with the OP's narative as the best course of action. So, the question becomes, what do we do next, we haven't gotten to the courtroom to discuss what might have been done differently.
MedWheeler
Member
^^ I agree. That's why I was simply trying to put out some of the elements of both sides of the respondents' posts. In fact, my first response (post 10), while self-extraction is my N1 priority, followed the OP's course.
JeffG
Member
Upon the arrival of law enforcement, the stance I will be in is: standing behind cover from bad guy's last known position, will be hands on top of my head, weapon holstered, and pointing to anything with my chin. I am sure I will be handcuffed, disarmed, and then we can sort things out.
9MMare
Member
There are 11 bullet points before 'you draw.' If you read them all, they develop into a progression of 'your actions and perceptions.' It's hard to throw all that out when you get to 'draw,' esp if you've been planning, as you were reading, to get out of Dodge.
As apparently, many would.
However if the purpose of that scenario is to discover how people would *safely disengage from the shooting and safely await first responders,* it could all have just been written in a paragraph setting the scene. *IMO*
Very good point.
In the scenario as presented, the armed citizen made the decision that returning fire was required. It was necessary that I make this assumption for the rest of the scenario to play out so that I could get to the question I wanted answers to, which is what are the priorities for the shooter after the bad guy has been stopped.
Deaf Smith
Member
My view is the best way to make my family safe is to KILL THE NUTJOB PRONTO! Right there, right now. Trying to move them out while gunfire is going on is not a wise idea.
Deaf
Hanzo581
Member
Deaf Smith
Member
No, but their risk of becoming victims may be a lot lower if you do not engage than it would be should you decide to do so.
Last edited:
Hanzo581
Member
No, I can't guarantee any plan would be successful, which is why I am not saying this or that "is not a wise idea".
Wisco
member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2013
- Messages
- 1,239
To try to kill him is certainly your prerogative as someone who is carrying.
I say "try" because I've seen some gunfights and they're not just a righteous good guy blowing away some terrorist with expertly placed face shots that kill someone instantly.
Once you engage you're going to draw fire in your direction (family too presumably) unless you drop the threat before he can return fire. I'm not saying engaging is the wrong answer here but it's worth considering how many bullets you might be attracting towards your family that may otherwise go elsewhere.
On topic all this is perhaps irrelevant. Except it was started as ".. what would you do after you fired and he was down".
But if this is going to be the line of discussion there are two elements missing which would weigh heavily in regards to what one might do. It is stated you are about 50 feet from the other carrier.
However not stated is how far are you from the badguy. And where in relation to his general line of sight (that is if he is not scanning 360 for targets)
These two would have a great bearing on my decisions.
But if this is going to be the line of discussion there are two elements missing which would weigh heavily in regards to what one might do. It is stated you are about 50 feet from the other carrier.
However not stated is how far are you from the badguy. And where in relation to his general line of sight (that is if he is not scanning 360 for targets)
These two would have a great bearing on my decisions.
Last edited:
The first big mistake made in the OP's list is not taking yourself and loved ones to cover. I wouldn't be evaluating the damage and extent of injuries of those that are already shot. I'd be taking cover and evaluating the threat to me and my lover ones.
Seen a training film, one of many, which included a photo of a guy who took a .44 mag to the face. Bullet entered below the eye, deflected downward (probably cracked the the facial bone structure), and exited the neck on the same side. This guy managed to crawl almost 100 yards. Anyone who can crawl that far could in theory still shoot.
A good way to distinguish between a mass murderer in the act and a defender trying to stop him is to watch and see whom they shoot. The mass murderer will continue shooting people who are no threat to him. The defender will shoot only at the mass murderer and will cease fire when the murderer goes down. The disadvantage to this identification strategy is that you have to wait for the murderer to shoot innocent people you might have saved had you not hesitated.
Trunk Monkey
member
Short video from Tatiana Whitlock giving a possible answer
Last edited:
armoredman
Member
Nuke the site from orbit - only way to be sure.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked