The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 15, 2012, 02:33 PM   #1
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,835
Do Rampage response training videos teach rampagers how to do it?

We have quite a few trained folks here. From another venue, it has been postulated that the current training videos for how to respond to a rampage, in fact, give hints and ideas to the a shooter on how to do it and awareness of countermeasures.

We've seen planning from Cho, the Aurora shooter and Columbine shooters that showed some sophistication.

So if you show this kind of video to a mass audience, do you set up the shooter to defeat it?

Reasonable thoughts please.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 03:10 PM   #2
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
I would think no more than the other sources of tactical information. While they may provide some insight, I do not think on the John Q. Public side of things that the information given out is something that cannot be reasoned by someone planning something. I cannot speak for LEA response training.

From what I've seen the information given to the public seems to boil down to 3 concepts; Run, hide, and to a lesser extent fight. Now applying that to two real life examples, the theater shooting and a school shooting, we can see how some of the ideas remain valid while others become moot.

In the theater shooting running and hiding become very difficult as there are limited exits and natural funnels for people, making it easy for a potential shooter to dominate the space. I do not think that it takes a training video for someone to reason that a theater is a confined space with a lot of people and limited exits.

A school shooting, given the lesser concentrations of people and higher segregation of space, the area would be harder to control without preparation that would likely get noticed. Running and hiding seem to be valid even if the potential shooter knows that people are going to run or lock themselves in separate spaces. To over come this a potential shooter would need to prepare in ways to control a much larger space such as disabling locks or planting crowd control type devices to direct where people run. Both of which would be difficult to do without having their efforts negated(locks fixed) or noticed(devices found or seen planting devices).

From what I've seen, fighting does seem to be relatively effective in the cases where people do choose to engage an active shooter. However it also seems that instances where people's reflex is fight rather than flight are few.

In the end unfortunately no matter what protocols people are taught, the potential shooter will always have an advantage by virtue of picking the time and place of the event. There will always be certain spaces that are just not easily secured or defensible as the world in general is not designed with being able to defend from attack in mind.
sigcurious is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 03:48 PM   #3
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Talking with Mas Ayoob about this, he says this is one reason why he wants students to have a carry permit, LEO credentials, or military ID. He wants to be sure he is training "certified good guys."
MLeake is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 05:32 PM   #4
zombietactics
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 7, 2012
Location: Northern California
Posts: 344
I suppose "sophistication" means different things to different people. I don't see anything sophisticated about the techniques used at Columbine or Aurora. What I do see is an unsophisticated focus on equipment (either type or sheer numbers) and little attention to anything else. Their choices seem to be based upon TV and movie references, and little else.

I have yet to hear of a single such attacker who was especially skilled or who even attended a single training class or shooting match. If there were training videos found in someone's apartment, it would be common knowledge by now. The concern seems unwarranted as such.

It doesn't take much of an advantage to dominate those unarmed and untrained.
zombietactics is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 05:46 PM   #5
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,835
If you had heard a presentation about the Columbine shooters, you would see that they had a well thought out plan. I'll pass on sharing it here. We went over it at Tom Given's Tactical Conference.

Cho and Aurora were not without planning. Let's not posture that we are tactical giants compared to them.

I would like opinions focused on the question. Would a Cho, Holmes, Columbine duo - having seen the training videos - be ready to take some advantage due to the plans?
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 05:56 PM   #6
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,904
Any sort of widely available information serves to inform and educate those who might use the knowledge for bad purposes as well as those who will use the knowledge for good purpose. That is the "two-edged-sword" of readily and widely available information.

The major instructors and schools try to vet in some ways those who will have access to the training. As MLeake points out, Massad Ayoob requires certain credentials. Gunsite requires a letter of reference and evidence of a clean background.

By its nature, information that can help you defend yourself necessarily contains information that would help one defeat those defenses. But there's really nothing that can be done about that sort of censorship. And as a policy matter that's a non-starter.

Perhaps what this means is the those interested in protecting themselves need to assume that at least some of those who would do harm have access to the same generally available defensive information, and they will need to find ways to deal with that fact. For example, training beyond what's widely available on YouTube, can be a useful edge.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 06:11 PM   #7
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,983
Years ago, I remember reading a book with a plotline that included a small group of people putting together a nuclear bomb. Don't remember the book or the author, but I do remember the author's note at the end. It said: "I have changed some details about how to put together a nuclear bomb. I did this solely as a salve for my conscience, not in any reasonable expectation that it matters a damn."

That's pretty much my take on any of this stuff. The world is full of people who can't or won't make sure they are teaching only bona fide good guys. Worry about it, or don't, based on your own conscience.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 06:17 PM   #8
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,835
I agree that as trainers we might want to watch for strange rangers as I once heard Mas say. I have been asked about a couple from trainers at times.

However, the main question from the group that asked me - was whether the rampage training videos for the average folks, like the Houston one, would aid the rampager.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 06:29 PM   #9
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,544
Reminds me of the early '70s.

We didn't have the Internet back then but somebody came up with the "Anarchist Cookbook"

All kinds of stuff, how to do in cops, how to make bombs, how to make pot cookies. All kinds of silly crap.

The LE community threw a Tessy fit. Everyone called for censorship.

I studied that book looking with a bomb tech's point of view.

That book was more of a danger to the would be anarchist, then the LE community.

If one wants the information, its out there, with or without the Internet.

You have tons of Military Field Manuel's available do to the freedom of information act. Don't need you tube.

I'm against censorship of any kind (short of kiddy ****).

Having said that, I do reserve the right to bar people from my classes, that is my right.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 07:47 PM   #10
zombietactics
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 7, 2012
Location: Northern California
Posts: 344
Quote:
If you had heard a presentation about the Columbine shooters, you would see that they had a well thought out plan. I'll pass on sharing it here. We went over it at Tom Given's Tactical Conference.

Cho and Aurora were not without planning. Let's not posture that we are tactical giants compared to them.
I was mistaken in my meaning. I make no claim of being a tactical expert. It just seemed that your OP was implying that level ("tactical expert") of sophistication on the part of those mentioned. Clearly I mistook your meaning as well.

I think my second point still hold true: I have yet to hear of a single such attacker who was especially skilled or who even attended a single training class or shooting match. If there were training videos found in someone's apartment, it would be common knowledge by now. The concern seems unwarranted as such.

By way of extending my remarks, it doesn't seem that kind of person goes very far in the training department, at least not in a focused, rational way. I am sure that some of them have a passing interest, but are just as likely to view an action movie as a "training film" as they would be something from a reputable source. There seems to be a kind of personality focused more on form than substance. The "rampager" seems to fit this mold.

Last edited by zombietactics; September 15, 2012 at 08:00 PM.
zombietactics is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 08:13 PM   #11
Smit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 18, 2012
Posts: 335
My opinion is no. If there's tactical information they want, they will most likely be able to find it somewhere. Additional concepts and strategies can be obtained through extended resources such as specialized classes, books, etc. There is also so many variables in different rampage/shooting situations that there is not "one" infinitely valuable piece of information that keeps the perp from getting caught or getting equalized by the police.
__________________
"Vegetarian, an old Indian word for bad hunter."
Smit is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 08:37 PM   #12
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,544
Odd this post comes out this afternoon and this evening someone sends me a copy of:

"Catalog of Unique, Concealed & Disguised Weapons, Concealments, Escape Techniques, Tactics & Tradecraft"

Shades of the "Anarchist Cookbook", 21st Century version.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 08:40 PM   #13
BGutzman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
I agree the information is all out there... The only in general thing I can say to counter a sophisticated attack is to be situationally aware and use lawful force in a manner to aggressively defend yourself.. I stumble for better words but the key is lawful use of force... no Rambo... think reasonable man...

Hesitation, timidness have no place in these situations but neither can you afford errors or mis-identification... I have no Idea of what to think of these videos overall..
__________________
Molon Labe
BGutzman is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 10:17 PM   #14
Slopemeno
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 19, 2007
Posts: 2,376
have any of you taken the FEMA course? Free. Online.
Slopemeno is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 12:44 AM   #15
DaleA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 1,688
Sigh.

I guess I’d say there’s a ‘balance’ to be considered. Balance the fact that most people are ‘good’ and will use the information to their advantage verses the very, very few that are ‘bad’ and will use the information to make their bad acts more effective.

Since I believe the ‘good’ folks vastly outnumber the ‘bad’ folks I guess I would say the potential for something good out weighs the potential for something bad.

Looked at it this way it’s pretty much my view on why easier access to concealed carry permits is a good thing.
DaleA is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 08:43 AM   #16
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
DaleA, true, but carry permits require at least a cursory criminal background check.
MLeake is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 11:08 AM   #17
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,835
I didn't want to comment directly for a bit.

One problem that someone might postulate is that the training videos if exposed to a mass audience might prime someone to try it.

The criminologists and psychologists who look at this stuff know that rampagers study past rampagers for inspiration and ideas. Seeing the panic and pain in the news coverage is vicariously rewarding them for their fantasies of their own action. Many plan on suicide. They have made their point and before the act reward themselves with the imagined suffering.

Would watching the videos with the initial killings reward them and push them? Interesting question.

Second, would the suggestions - hide, flee, fight - tell them how to negate these. Without details, fleeing can be analyzed as part of a trap. It's been done - that's why I said there has been sophistication with some of these folks.

Fight - sounds good but the scenarios are really close quarters and not realistic for many possible venues. So does that turn the killer towards a venue that negates the charge of the staplers and Iphones?

The videos avoid, IMHO, trained folks with firearms - that is deliberate as adding firearms for SD is anathema to the powers that be.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 11:36 AM   #18
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
I did not consider the inciting/pushing factor of such videos or news coverage. In regards to that I think that yes they would provide a push for some people either strengthening their fantasy or even a step closer to reality. This seems apparent from other contexts of deviant behavior, where fantasies are re-enforced and engrained by repetition which may lead to eventual lack of satisfaction from the fantasy alone.

However, I would suspect that unless someone is actively being treated for something and actively excluding stimuli that aggravate negative tendencies and thought patterns, that the presence of of those specific types of videos is inconsequential. Even if that specific type of media were highly controlled, there would always be an outlet for the fantasy. There has been too much violence recorded in history and those specific types of media are a mere drop in the bucket, and someone predisposed to a violent fantasy, unchecked, will seek out similar available materials.
sigcurious is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 11:53 AM   #19
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,835
Reasonable point, we have folks who read violent Biblical passages and went off.

I wonder if the concern is the great old institutional fear of liability. They show the video and a watcher from their institutions seems to use it for planning.

I know places that won't teach first aid as they fear if they do and there is a rampage and the first aid is misused (tourniquet around neck - ), they will get sued. Letting the victim bleed out has less liability.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 12:02 PM   #20
armoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,853
Pax, "Clear and Present Danger". by Tom Clancy, IIRC.

Police manuals have been out there for years, and I rarely hear of criminals availing themselves of them.
__________________
http://czfirearms.us/ same original CZForum, new location.
armoredman is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 12:09 PM   #21
David White
Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2012
Posts: 88
You know what they say about a plan when the SHTF?
Anything and everything can change.
David White is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 01:20 PM   #22
ClydeFrog
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,798
SPOILER ALERT; Soft Target, active shooters....

This topic mirrors a few plot elements in the novel; Soft Target by pro-2A author Steven Hunter(I Sniper, Point of Impact). If you read the great novel, you might get my point(s).
Active or "spree" shooters may have detailed plans or elaborate methods but if I were in Homeland Security or LE, I'd be leery of secondary IEDs or other terror acts designed to "draw in" security or LE.
A skilled marksman could shoot a target(citizen, police officer, elected official) then as the media & crowd grow, set off a IED or bomb.

More safeguards could be added too like alerts or "BOLOs"(be on the lookout) but many places have privacy/HIPPA type laws to prevent private details from public access.
Some states-cities like WA have "watch out for this dude" databases & the US Secret Service monitors people with; "inappropriate interests" towards federal level elected officials.

CF
ClydeFrog is offline  
Old September 17, 2012, 03:32 AM   #23
raimius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2008
Posts: 1,360
Pretty much any material on violent crime could be an "inspiration" for the criminally minded. However, AARs, analysis, etc, are also highly useful for those of us who would much rather stop a rampage than start one.

Since active shooter and the like are often stopped by non-LEOs as often as by the SWAT team (or more often), it seems that having information out there for those wanting to learn how to defend and mitigate against attacks is pretty reasonable.
raimius is offline  
Old September 17, 2012, 05:12 AM   #24
Jim March
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,328
There appear to be three classes of mass shooters:

1) Total lunatics. The recent Aurora shooter and the guy that shot Gabby Giffords in Tucson both fall squarely into this category. Tactical knowledge tends to be the lowest of all categories. I suspect this class is also among the more common types of mass killers.

2) Racists or other bigots. The recent Sikh Temple shooter is of this category, as is that jackass in Norway and various "Sudden Jihadi Syndrome" types like the military shrink who shot up a base with a handgun not too long ago . These types are "sane" by the standards of most courts and are capable of very methodical planning - the Norway case is a horrific example. I consider them extremely dangerous, probably the most dangerous category.

3) "Specific grudge cases": the shooter has a personal grudge against at least some of the victims...see also the Columbine shooters, and a LOT of cases where a guy goes after his "ex" and takes out others as well - or the sort who goes back to a former workplace to "get even". The level of planning seems to be (on average) somewhere between the above two types. (Some of these sorts are actually crazy, others...not so much.)

Mental deficiencies among the "not totally crazy" sort are common - usually either anger management issues from hell, or something in the sociopath/psychopath spectrum. Or...well, they're just plain a-holes - meaning, usually, "not raised right", "spoiled brats", etc. There really are people in the world who expect to "get their way" at every stage of the game and get furious when it doesn't happen.

What else..."anger management"...fancy way of saying "somebody who enjoys the feeling of both power and loss of control that unleashing total rage entails". These people enjoy the "incredible Hulk" feeling of going totally bellowing out-of-control nuts in what they see as "justified rage". I detest this sort of so-called "human" more than just about any other. It is NOT "insanity" in any sort of fashion that might excuse horrible (or especially murderous) behavior.

The true mentally ill sorts (such as the recent Tucson shooter) have my pity. In that case it was genuine schizophrenia...the videos he made before the killing are absolutely tell-tale. I am not in favor of killing that nut - it wouldn't be right because we might one day be able to really cure that and even that aside, we need to study critters like this (and I suspect the Aurora shooter is similar) and you can't study the dead near as well...

For the record: I'm not completely mentally normal myself - I'm a mild-ish Asperger's case. But that isn't linked to either violence or loss of judgement and anybody who knows me will tell you that if anything I don't get angry enough .
__________________
Jim March
Jim March is offline  
Old September 17, 2012, 10:10 AM   #25
playin' hookey
Member
 
Join Date: August 20, 2011
Location: South Boston, VA
Posts: 44
Sum of All Fears

is, I believe, the Tom Clancy novel about terrorists building a nuclear bomb, which Pax quoted.
playin' hookey is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13514 seconds with 9 queries