A morbid perspective on active shooter situations and saving lives

[Trailboss]

I personally try to avoid gun-free zones, abortion clinics, liberal political events and any event where a notable number of gun control advocates or Occupy types might attend. They are pretty much on their own if a mass shooting occurs and I won't be there to defend them. However, at the venues where I do spend time, there are conservatives, children, families and gun owners. I would fight to defend the innocent and I suspect that I would not be alone in the fight.

 

[Goosebrown]

The country you claim affinity for, through Nationalism, would be a far , far different place right now if our ancestors felt and behaved in the manner outlined above.

True. It's s different place now. Only half the people are worth a bucket of cold spit.

 

[jbett98]

Suzanna Gratia Hupp was eating lunch with her parents when a nut case rammed his truck through the front window of the cafe in Texas. He then proceeded to shoot at everyone in the restaurant. While hiding behind an upturned table with her parents, she had multiple opportunities to take him down but was unarmed because of a new law forbidding concealed carry in Texas. She watched as her father got shot as he tried to tackle the shooter. Her mother refused to run away and was shot in the head as she held her dying husband.


From the internet:

Surviving the Luby's shooting, subsequent activism
See also: Luby's shooting
Hupp and her parents were having lunch at the Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen in 1991 when a mass shooting took place. The gunman shot 44 people in all, killing 24 of them, including himself. The fatally wounded included both of Hupp's parents. Hupp later expressed regret about deciding to remove her gun from her purse and lock it in her car, lest she risk possibly running afoul of the state's concealed weapons laws; during the shootings, she reached for her weapon but then remembered that it was "a hundred feet away in my car." Her father, Al Gratia, feeling he "needed to do something", tried to rush the gunman and was fatally shot in the chest instead. Hupp, eventually seeing an escape through a broken window (broken by the shoulder of another fleeing victim), grabbed her mother by the shirt telling her "Come on, we have to go now!" As Hupp moved toward the only escape, she believed her mother to be following her, only to find out later that Ursula had also been killed.

Hupp was 32 years old at the time of the shooting. As a survivor of the incident, Hupp testified across the country in support of concealed-handgun laws, citing that if there had been a second chance to prevent the slaughter, she would have violated the Texas law and carried the handgun inside her purse into the restaurant that day and it being highly likely she would also still have her parents with her today. She also stated in her testimony that she would have taken the felony on her head over having lost her parents through the tragedy, adding that those shouldn't be the choices, however, and that people should be able to defend themselves in a true emergency without having to choose one over another. She testified across the country in support of concealed handgun laws, and was elected to the Texas House of Representatives in 1996.[8] The concealed-weapons bill was signed by then-Governor George W. Bush.[9]

 

[Vanillagerrilla]

"The two most important days in a man's life are the day he is born, and the day he finds out why..."
One day each, of us will be faced with the "why" day and that may be the day some A-hole decides to shoot up a movie theater or your church, and you happen to be right there in the middle of it.
We can all sit here on the internet and say how we would react, but the truth is something different. Kids, families, bus loads of orphans and nuns all play a role in the response we take.
There is no right answer.
I hope that I would not be the only armed citizen in the group trying to stop the threat....

 

[Medic!]

................

 

[Pops1911]

I heard it first from my DI in boot back in 1968. "Don't die for your country. Make the other S.O. B. die for his country". I believe this still holds true. Just my .02. What do I know? I'm an old guy now.

 

[Stomper]

My late teen and early 20 something children (six in total) don't think us "old guys" know a whole lot....

 

[rick benjamin]

Back from a day at the range.
Eight folks attending a CC class for both Oregon and Utah.
Taught by 540Tactical
Awesome detail in the legal issues involved.
Range time spent on tactical draw, fire, reload
What to do and expect after the incident.

That's eight more folks that have chosen for the good order of society.

 

[PaulB47]

"Every mass shooting gives more momentum to the anti gun advocates that want to ultimately strip us of or firearms"

That I doubt. Sure, it gives politicians something to whine about. But the people are not believing them. More and more are thinking, "I'd better get a gun myself."

I believe Molyneux is correct on the OP; you must look out for your own, not the general public (although I think there are good arguments for the opposite side as well - so use your judgement!). However I should say that his commitment to RKBA is a lot more theoretical and logical than it is visceral. He really does not believe that arms keep an evil government at bay. I've heard him say rather negative things about the utility of firearms. It's just that, as an anarchist, he naturally does not believe government should exist, much less "protect" us.

 

[tionico]

It's not about them being worthy of life, but it's about them being worth your potential death. See, this would be different somewhere like Arizona or Utah where odds are the majority of people aren't voting to enslave you. In SoCal though, that's a pretty safe bet. That's the point being made here.

As bad as it sounds, if I saw someone walking in with a rifle to something like a CPUSA meeting, I would just walk away. But that's an exceedingly explicit example that goes beyond the specificity of any shooting known to me.

I don't think I'd take on extreme risk myself, but if I were in such a setting, particularly if some of those partygoers were my co-workers (no matter their "values".. more on that later) I'd certainly work hard to find an advantageous place from which to bring fire to bear, IF I could be reasonably certain no innocents are endangered (a la Nick Meli at Clackamas two years ago)

The eternal question arises: AM I my brother's keeper? The scriptures tell me I am. If he's out of my reach, and I can't help him, fine. Another verse states this: if you see a person in need, (note well, that is NOT "want " or "preference", but NEED, as in he gets it met or dies) and have the means to meet that need, and withhold it,,,, you have STOLEN it from him. Will I quicky steal the very life of another when I can prevent it? Nope. If I had been in there, carrying in spite of the Defenseless Victim Enrichment Zone, and a trio (I tend to believe the early reports from mutliple sources rather than the later "redacted" version in the press) came in and opened fire.... my first thought, of course, would be to take cover or concealment. From that point, I'd watch and work hard to find an opportunity to take out one or more of the shooters. Meli had a good shot from excellent cover, but the shot wasn't clear....... and while he waited to get that clear shot, the perp decided it was game over and checked out. In situations like public shootings, most perps hav very little bravery.... as soon as opposition arises they fold. "Most times". Putting an extra ventilation hole into one of those burkhas then ducking down and moving sideways.... who knows? I was not there. If the perps were intent on firing into the main crowd, someone on the fringes might have a clear shot..... perhaps duck into a doorway and fire from there.

I'd take my chances that despite the Defenseles Victim COncentration ZOne designation, the Shriff and police chief of Can Bernardino City and County would elect to refuse to prosecute me for the DVCZ charge..... and the DA would not file on his own, and if that failed, that any jury called to try me would acquit.
Who knows but what one mass murder in progress, getting halted by one plain everyday Joe... taking his chances of not suffering for "breaking the law" and in spite of that saving lives he COULD have just run out the door and abandoned. Besides, if California's gun laws could not stop this and it took a Good Guy with a Gun to stop it and HE had to break the law to do it, but did anyway, THEN the county/city refused to prosecute because he did the right thing and saved XX lives.... it just MIGHT be so that a few folks in the state government could possibly consider changing the carry laws... especially of folks all over that state began to clamour for getting their own Mother May I Cards so THEY won't be helplessly crouching in the corners wetting themselves...... or dead.

 

[tionico]

They're also paid by society to do it. Their daily risks are compensated monetarily. The average CHL holder is not a professional in this regard. The only compensation you might get by engaging in this (Keep in mind that I am not suggesting that compensation is a reason or motivation to act) would be landing a book deal afterwards if it was something really crazy.

NEWS FLASH... when is the last time you READ that pesky Second Article of Ammendment? Read it again... five times, slowlhy, for comprehension. Then consider this: that Article clearly places the BURDEN for "the security of a free state"... WHERE? On the militia? Nope. (they are merely the whole people, armed and prepared, and voluntarily serving anyway, so that would be a close but not complete answer). On government? ABSOLUTELY not. How about military? No, again. Private security details, paid and trained by the corporations they are hired to protect? Again, no. It places the responsibility for "the security of a free state" on THE PEOPLE, and THAT is why the RIGHT to arms is declared to be the unalienable right OF THE PEOPLE. It does say "the right OF THE PEOPLE", does it not? That is to whom the right belongs. Why? Because THE PEOPLE are they to whom "the security of a free state" is entrusted. Not cops. Not military. Not hired guns. Not government. THE PEOPLE.

its about doing the right thing......

 

[tionico]

I don't think so. Only people that are like you, your family and your friends, are worth you taking a risk for them. If I knew I saved a life of someone that was anti gun rights, I'd be sick at my stomach. Especially if I had risked myself (any by extension my family's livelihood) for them.

and by so risking your own and saving his bacon, you have just spoken LOUDLY AND CLEARLY that your position is firmly held, necessary, rational, and a benefit to society, particularly in this case, HIS place in it. You can throw rhetoric, statistics, logic, true life stories at guys like that for years..... but remember the old saying: there are no atheists in foxholes with incoming...... reality has a way of piercing through all the rhetoric, facts, etc, and showing people who are wrong, that they are wrong. How loudly do you think someone saving his life when he did not have to would speak to a rabid antigunner?

 

[cascadianliberty2012]

NEWS FLASH... when is the last time you READ that pesky Second Article of Ammendment? Read it again... five times, slowlhy, for comprehension. Then consider this: that Article clearly places the BURDEN for "the security of a free state"... WHERE? On the militia? Nope. (they are merely the whole people, armed and prepared, and voluntarily serving anyway, so that would be a close but not complete answer). On government? ABSOLUTELY not. How about military? No, again. Private security details, paid and trained by the corporations they are hired to protect? Again, no. It places the responsibility for "the security of a free state" on THE PEOPLE, and THAT is why the RIGHT to arms is declared to be the unalienable right OF THE PEOPLE. It does say "the right OF THE PEOPLE", does it not? That is to whom the right belongs. Why? Because THE PEOPLE are they to whom "the security of a free state" is entrusted. Not cops. Not military. Not hired guns. Not government. THE PEOPLE.

its about doing the right thing......

Well, I'd say that mostly applies to more existential threats than the occasional active shooter that we see. It is the people who are ultimately responsible for security, I haven't argued against that, but if it is just you, and your enemy is better armed and has the upper-hand, then why do you have to run in there as a "hero" in a suicidal fashion? You don't. Having a handgun and a psycho with a rifle doesn't mean you have the "means" to stop the situation, it just means you have a chance... one that sure as hell doesn't favor you. If you have to act to save yourself, then you should defend yourself ruthlessly. Running into an active shooter situation to save strangers, not my family, not my friends, not myself, but strangers? No.

By the way, it is a RIGHT, not an obligation. Freedom flows both ways; it is the freedom to act, and the freedom to not.

 

[tionico]

Well, I'd say that mostly applies to more existential threats than the occasional active shooter that we see. It is the people who are ultimately responsible for security, I haven't argued against that, but if it is just you, and your enemy is better armed and has the upper-hand, then why do you have to run in there as a "hero" in a suicidal fashion? You don't. Having a handgun and a psycho with a rifle doesn't mean you have the "means" to stop the situation, it just means you have a chance... one that sure as hell doesn't favor you. If you have to act to save yourself, then you should defend yourself ruthlessly. Running into an active shooter situation to save strangers, not my family, not my friends, not myself, but strangers? No.

By the way, it is a RIGHT, not an obligation. Freedom flows both ways; it is the freedom to act, and the freedom to not.

remember, I laid out the scenario taht I am an attendee at the shindig turned shootemup. WOULD I run into such a situation? I don't know. I do not know the specifics. If I were able to assess the risks, and determine I have a good opportunity to respond appripriately and remain safe enough to tip the balance? Likely I'd go. And reassess along the way.
Existential threats are the things that crop up to take lives.... inocent lives. Security is security. Either a society is generally secure, or it is generally at risk. Sort of like climate, being weather over a long term. One shooter at a nank in Kansas is not necessarily a sign of general chaos and lawlessness. But lately there seems to be a sudden surge in moslem jihad.... in THIS cuontry. I've been within a few blocks of that government building where the moslem terror mongers kille a bunch of people for no reason. THAT is a serious breach of security. Yes, my handgun vs a pyscho with a rifle is not a mandate to go, on its face. But maybe I can see that sicko through the windows..... and realise if he continues his narrow focus on his present task, and maybe if I were to quietly go inside, holding to his flank..... remember the account of two of King David's soliders, young lads, sent on an errand a ways from the camp, coming across the enemy's encampment.. up the hill... and they agree together "hey, lets go up the hill and see what might happen... never can tell". they ended up spooking the enemy who fled, running for their lives, leaving the area.... and neither one of these two chaps was even discovered. Or how abuot Nick Meli, Clackamas Towne Centre Mall, two years ago... three days before Sandy Hook? Don't know about it? Find it and read it. He did exactly what you said not to do.... and ended the shooting spree. The perp had enough ammo in prepped mags to kill several hundred more people than the two he'd managed to kill already.

 

[Tooskie]

I will never understand the kind of selfish cowardice thinking that goes with, "I would only want to save my own" type thinking... Just imagine, TRY & imagine, the commander in chief getting on Nat television & saying that... Try n imagine the reaction.. By troops, by police, by Americans in general..!! Open mindedness.

It's great that this guy gets people thinking & exercises & shows the power & beauty of free speech.. It's something to think about. But the thought of it makes me sick to my stomach..

Thanksgiving dinner..??!! Are you bubblegum'n serious.. Oh yea, tell your family & friends, in fact, give a speech!! To your loved ones explaining, "regarding the mass shooting yes, I have the training, the skills & was armed.. But it was in a part of the mall, by the farmers market..." Or "Zales" or "Foot Locker" or "Amber-zombie & bubblegum..!! So it was likely a bunch of left wing liberal, anti-gun yuppie-dicks.. So..! instead of taking action & using my skills & resources to protect everybody in danger..!! I got THE bubblegum OUT..!! So I could be here.. With you fine people.. Cuz I new you'd miss me... So this year, let's give thanks to the freedom to be a douche bag.. & allow me to say.. You're welcome.."

Of course you'd find a much more grandiose/heroic way of telling it & justifying your lack of action.. But imagine your life, if, not only your family, but all if America saw your speech.. Like, if it were on the news.. Seriously think about that..

 

[Ura-Ki]

There is only one moral answer here! We, as Americans have the moral obligation to our selves, our families, and to God him self to take what ever steps to protect what matters most, THE GIFT OF LIFE! I am the fifth of six generations of my family that has served, or is serving this country in time of war. We didn't ask who deserved to live or die, we didn't check to see if some one was some how different from us or not. We fight to save the lives of others and we fight to save those who cannot protect them selves! Simple as that. I run toward the sound of gunfire! That is the right thing to do!

My family has bled and died for five generations so that YOU have the ability to choose who lives and who does not? I DON'T THINK SO!!! Only GOD has that right This discussion should be about the selflessness of saving the innocent regardless of the cost to our selves, Nothing else! When I go to meet my maker, I will be able to look him squarely in the eye and say, Senior Master Chief reporting for duty sir, and I will do so with a clear sense of honor, and I will be welcomed with a well done Chief, well done!

 

[cascadianliberty2012]

remember, I laid out the scenario taht I am an attendee at the shindig turned shootemup. WOULD I run into such a situation? I don't know. I do not know the specifics. If I were able to assess the risks, and determine I have a good opportunity to respond appripriately and remain safe enough to tip the balance? Likely I'd go. And reassess along the way.
Existential threats are the things that crop up to take lives.... inocent lives. Security is security. Either a society is generally secure, or it is generally at risk. Sort of like climate, being weather over a long term. One shooter at a nank in Kansas is not necessarily a sign of general chaos and lawlessness. But lately there seems to be a sudden surge in moslem jihad.... in THIS cuontry. I've been within a few blocks of that government building where the moslem terror mongers kille a bunch of people for no reason. THAT is a serious breach of security. Yes, my handgun vs a pyscho with a rifle is not a mandate to go, on its face. But maybe I can see that sicko through the windows..... and realise if he continues his narrow focus on his present task, and maybe if I were to quietly go inside, holding to his flank..... remember the account of two of King David's soliders, young lads, sent on an errand a ways from the camp, coming across the enemy's encampment.. up the hill... and they agree together "hey, lets go up the hill and see what might happen... never can tell". they ended up spooking the enemy who fled, running for their lives, leaving the area.... and neither one of these two chaps was even discovered. Or how abuot Nick Meli, Clackamas Towne Centre Mall, two years ago... three days before Sandy Hook? Don't know about it? Find it and read it. He did exactly what you said not to do.... and ended the shooting spree. The perp had enough ammo in prepped mags to kill several hundred more people than the two he'd managed to kill already.

If Jihad is such a problem then why don't we organize and root out the problem ourselves? Oh, wait, everyone is too scared of the feds getting in the way, aka, the SA with badges.

Of course I know about the Clackamas shooting, yeah it was stopped by him. He lined up to try for a shot when the attacker's AR jammed. That case isn't lining up with what we're talking about. He didn't run across the mall to get there. He was nearby and took prudent measures. Clearly it is dependent on the situation.

As noble as self-sacrifice may be, there's a reason that altruism is so rare; it is something that gets bred out of the gene pool due to the massive risk it poses.

 

[Tooskie]

Don't get me wrong, nobody, but nobody is obligated to move toward gunfire & take on a terrorist.. Nobody's going to chastise somebody who carry's a gun, but has no training.. Or somebody who just got scared.. But to leave ppl behind & condemn them because they hate guns..?

What if they hate guns because they had a loved one murdered or raped @ gun point? What if they were held at gun point? Most "tough guys" would say, "fight fire with fire! & get a gun yourself..!" But even I'm a "gun nut" & I know that that response is NOT for everybody.. What if, & God forbid, they're good innocent people, with family's, childeren, parents, wives &/or husbands.. & they just don't think like you..?

Do you think they would all turn their backs on you..? Doubtfully.. Though that's likely what you'd say, isn't it?

Our troops fight for all of us.. Both Right & Left wing.. Pro & Anti gun.. Thousands of troops comeback voting against gun rights in America. Believing it would drastically decrease gun violence. That guns in the hands of untrained civilians is a terrible idea... Google it, it's true..

But.. The way "I..!! Personally..!! Feel..? Any..!! Able bodied, strong cop able American that stands up for & puts their life on the line, let-alone lays their life down, for a weaker less or incapable American, in danger.. Especially in the face of death &/or terrorism.. & does so, indiscriminately.. Is a God-damn hero.. & it would never be looked at in vain.. Except by the tragically narrow minded.

I know most of America agree's with me on that.. It's way to easy to speak on these quiet little forums, with ZERO eyes on you & nobody knows who you are..

It is our jobs as the strong & the capable, to protect the weak & vulnerable... & it is the same country, constitution & bill of rights that allows you to have guns, others to hate guns, you
To go right & others to go left..
You never know the kind of fwd thinking that may come, from a gun activist saving an anti-gun activist &/or dying trying to do so.. Imagine the # of eyes you would open, in doing so..

Nobody should ever pick n choose.. It's easy to say.. Too easy.. But living with yourself, especially if everybody knew what you did... Good luck with that..

 

[Tooskie]

Most importantly..
"What would Chuck Norris SAY..??!!"
By the by, I love the way it corrects curse words wit "bubblegum.."
WHAT THE BUBBLEGUM'S WIT-DAT..??!!!
Bubblegumm'n bubblegum-bubblegum..!! WTB..!!

 

[tionico]

If Jihad is such a problem then why don't we organize and root out the problem ourselves? Oh, wait, everyone is too scared of the feds getting in the way, aka, the SA with badges.

Of course I know about the Clackamas shooting, yeah it was stopped by him. He lined up to try for a shot when the attacker's AR jammed. That case isn't lining up with what we're talking about. He didn't run across the mall to get there. He was nearby and took prudent measures. Clearly it is dependent on the situation.

As noble as self-sacrifice may be, there's a reason that altruism is so rare; it is something that gets bred out of the gene pool due to the massive risk it poses.

Stories I read have Nick hearing the shots, and moving TOWARD them, putting himself in an advantageous position to deal with the threat. Another would have been hero is a long time personal friend of mine who was also in that mall then. She always carries, is an incredible shot, extensive training, etc. She was in another wing, close enough to barel hear shots and the commotion, but before she could take action the mall went on lockdown, and the doors to all the shops closed and locket..... (good job it wasn't a fire... they'd have been trapped....) she wanted to get out to go TOWARD the shooting, but could not. Not even the proprietor of that space had access to any way out. The "altruism" of which you speak is not all that rare. Too often it is not made much of, and certainly is not in the press when they "cover" such incidents. Had I not had access to local news, I'd never have heard of the CC who ended that attack. NOTHING on the national news. He never sought glory or fame, and likely would rather his name had never been pubilshed.