Do Rampage response training videos teach rampagers how to do it?

[ClydeFrog]

The Hulk remarks reminds me of a recent conversation I had with a guy who claimed to be a OEF-OIF combat veteran & ex-sheriff's deputy.
The "ex-cop" said he was under treatment for PTSD & "Bruce Banner Syndrome". I'm not a mental health expert or doctor but I never heard of this condition before. He said he was prone to fits of rage/aggressive behavior brought on by stress/conflict.

I also wanted to bring up; No Heroes, the non-fiction book by Danny Coulson(check spelling). Coulson was the senior FBI agent & CT expert who was picked to set-up/run the elite HRT(Hostage Rescue Team). He wrote that he purchased several copies of "The Turner Diaries" & required every unit member to read the book. Coulson wanted the HRT members & FBI staff to have a clear understanding of the anti-government movement and be able to handle those events if required.

CF

[Double Naught Spy]

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

Sophistication? Interesting classification for such shooters. If a rampage shooter shows any time of planning, they are sophisticated?

I am 100% certain Charlie Whitman and Sylvia Seegrist, the Columbine shooters, etc. had not see such videos because they weren't being made back then, but they had their own forms of sophistication. Robert Wayne Gladden, Jr. was supposed to have been quite sophisticated because of the way he snuck the shotgun into school, but beyond that, no big plans.

Suggesting rampage response videos are teaching these people are like saying violent video games are teaching these people. Having a bit of gear and some tacticool accessories or homemade bombs. You could get the same input from Hollywood movies.

Some bad guys are more difficult to deal with, no doubt and it does seem to just about throw the cops completely out of their comfort zone when the bad guys show any particular skill, talent, or planning, but that is the nature of the beast. Some are going to have it. Some always have.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Columbine shooters had a well worked out bomb plot that failed because they didn't have the techy know-how for the bombs. That was sophisticated compared to just shooting up the place -that wasn't their plan.

Some shooters have set up to hit the fleeing victims.

Cho and Aurora certainly showed planning.

[zincwarrior]

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.

The UT tower shooter was extremely well trained. It took civilians pinning him down with hunting rifles to break up his attack.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Marine, IIRC. While not rampagers - the Miami shootout folks were not novices.

As an aside - in the movie Full Metal Jacket - R. Lee Ermey (familiar to us) plays a DI. He goes off on being a great Marine marksman and cites Whitman and Lee Harvey Oswald as exemplars.

Dr. David Grossman - psychologist and solider argues that some rampage killers get enough simulated practice on modern video games to be decent shooters and lose their inhibitions.

Anyway, I told the concerned party that we have more to worry about rather than the HPD training videos. Someone who wanted info has more choices than one can shake a stick out.

The issue of whether a mass showing primes someone to be a shooter is a different issue than tactics.

I also mentioned that the best defense is training folks on campus with guns and permits but that I doubt the questioning group would go along with that. Horrors.

[wayneinFL]

There's all kinds of information out there that can be misused.

Anybody remember the thread where that kid asked for help with a Remongton 870, got some advice, and he shot somebody? What was the outcome of that? I really don't see liability there.

[starscream66]

I have to agree with Jim March. Not every "rampager" or shooter falls into the same category. Some of these people have legitimate mental illness. *When I say legitimate mental illness I am NOT condoning this behavior what so ever. In my opinion they deserve life in prison or a mental facility (depending on the severity)*. My point is that no two people are exactly the same so we have to break things down into easier categories so that we can try to understand. Bottom line is that I see no reason that anyone should murder innocent people for any reason. Even if someone was bullied as a child (Columbine) they have no sane reason to carry out acts of terror. As I grew up when someone made fun of me my dad taught me "if someone makes fun of you F*** em, if they attack you F*** em up!. Essentially my point is that people have no reason to attack out of agression in a civilian setting, and those that do should be sent upstate for the rest of their lives

[ClydeFrog]

I think some of the misunderstandings or conflicts about these events come from how you define the labels or terms.
I'd call a subject a spree shooter if they "snap" or "wig out" then start shooting at random people they don't know.
A "mass murderer" would be someone like the Fort Hood Texas officer or the LIRR shooting event subject(who used a Ruger P85 9x19mm pistol). These are criminal acts & maybe terrorism. They used a plan & prepared to kill unarmed people.
In the mid 1990s, there were a series of USPS employees who; "went postal".
Those may be brought on by stress, PTSD or mental health problems.
Crazy people can't "go crazy" on command & they can not buy firearms, load ammunition, draw maps or make plans, drive vehicles THEN claim to be "out of it". Prosecutors & most judges don't buy that BS.

Clyde
ps; LTC David Grossman's non fiction books are worth reviewing. They offer great insight to armed professionals.

[spacecoast]

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."

I don't think this is much of a guarantee.

[MLeake]

What would be a guarantee?

At the least, each of the above passed a criminal background check.

[zombietactics]

I think some of the misunderstandings or conflicts about these events come from how you define the labels or terms.

Yep. I have a pretty specific idea what "rampager" calls to my mind ... something different than what Glenn has explained. That's why there can appear to be a disagreement, where there isn't one.

[Double Naught Spy]

Columbine shooters had a well worked out bomb plot that failed because they didn't have the techy know-how for the bombs. That was sophisticated compared to just shooting up the place -that wasn't their plan.

Some shooters have set up to hit the fleeing victims.

Cho and Aurora certainly showed planning.

Glenn, sure, but the notion of "sophistication" when compared to completely unplanned or scatterbrained attacks isn't much of a comparison. It sort of reminds me of how cops are generally set up to deal with the LCD of bad guys which often show a low level of competence and preparation, but when going up against competent bad guys who prepared in advance, the cops often suffer. The standard against which sophistication, preparation, and competence are compared is really pretty darned low.

What would be a guarantee?

At the least, each of the above passed a criminal background check.

Right. Ayoob and a variety of other professionals are being responsible and doing due diligence in making sure to the reasonable best of their abilities to not train bad guys. Besides, nobody said it was a guarantee.

Yep. I have a pretty specific idea what "rampager" calls to my mind ... something different than what Glenn has explained. That's why there can appear to be a disagreement, where there isn't one.

Mass, rampage, spree, serial, and similar other multiple terms often bring confusion and there is often overlap in categories and whether one falls into one category or not sometimes depends on how you look at the situation and who is defining it. As seen here, folks don't even agree on what the categories mean and so have trouble with discussing them.

[ClydeFrog]

The FBI & one of their former top profilers; Robert Ressler define a "serial killer" as a subject(s) who kill using the same way with the same weapons-methods at different times. Serial killers must also have killed at least three victims.
Ressler, a former US Army officer(0-6/CIDC) , wrote a few non fiction books on criminal behavior & serial killers. To me, he's more creditable than John Douglas.

Douglas, a retired FBI special agent & profiler wrote about a lot of things the FBI either quit using or was later shown to be unrelated/useless.

Clyde

[armoredman]

You want guarantees? Go to a graveyard, only guaranteed thing in life.
Everything else is a loaded crapshoot, with both sides trying to load it their direction
Yes you are right, it IS Sum of all Fears, Clear and Present Danger was the plane into the Capitol...I lost my Clancy books, last forced move.

[ClydeFrog]

Some rampage or "spree" killers also want to provoke a LE response so they can go out in a "suicide by cop" event. That factor is a part of Hunter's novel; Soft Target.
LE & homeland security groups train for these incidents knowing that a violent subject(s) may be unstable or want to force a confrontation by attacking unarmed people or public places(schools, malls, movie theaters, etc).
It's a good chance that a violent subject you may encounter in a spree shooting won't really care about being arrested or even shot by SWAT/LE.

Clyde

[Double Naught Spy]

You want guarantees? Go to a graveyard, only guaranteed thing in life.

Even that is wrong, LOL. Lots of people never make it to graveyards.

Clyde, why are you drawing information from two different fiction writers? I appreciate the FBI dropping some of Douglas' work, but I am certain they have not replaced it with Ressler's fictional works, or Hunter's, LOL.

Interesting definition for serial killer that you provided. It would not fit numerous serial killers who manage to use a variety of methods/weapons to kill their victims such as Ted Bundy and Ángel Maturino Reséndiz.

[ChileVerde1]

Not sure if this was mentioned but there is a nationwide push by all LEO's to have a standardized training for "active shooter" response. I'm a trainer for the US Border Patrol. This enables officers and agents from different agencies that happen to be both on scene and armed at an active shooter situation to be able to form up as an impromptu tactical team and agressively go after the subject or subjects. We are no longer trained to wait on SWAT. I can't go into specifics because of the sensitive nature of the training but it covers and standardizes basic CQB formations, etc... for officers so they can basically show up on scene and automatically function as a tactical team and clear rooms, use bounding cover, etc...

I advise armed civilians, who I support fully, to use caution around these situations and to avoid involvement if possible so as not to get confused for a threat and shot. We get paid to do this. Obviously if your life is in imminent danger or its expedient to use deadly force to stop a rampage shoot away, but please don't go room clearing because it's an already confusing enough situation for us without armed friendlies running around that may be accidentaly shot.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Good advice - I heard a police presenter on active shooters who said that if an armed citizen starts moving around, he or she probably will get shot.

An LEO here told me that he knows of a guy who was running to a mall where there was a shooting with his gun out to save his wife. He came within a hair's breath of being shot.

How can LEOs know who is a good guy? Some rampage shooters from the professional classes come to the scene dressed professionally and open up. Some can be professionals who work there. Look at Amy Bishop - if the police arrive and she didn't give up, the campus cops might know her as a professor. Is she an armed good person professor or a killer?

[Ike666]

I was the police psychologist for the state police at Tech. I arrived on-scene about 45 minutes after the last shot was fired. I then worked the investigation for the next 32 days straight.

I can tell you unequivocally that Seung Hui Cho invested in quite a bit of planning. Among other things, he spent quite a bit of time at the range (National Forest Range outside of Blacksburg). He was observed there by a number of individuals practicing multiple target engagements and tactical reloads. Several of the people we interviewed commented that they thought he was an IDPA/USPSA shooter.

Survivors from Norris described him moving calmly from classroom to classroom; several described "rapid magazine changes", "he knew where his bullets were, kept reloading" and so forth.

He not only chained the doors but left a stick note on the door that there was a bomb and if anyone tried to remove the chain it would detonate.

He dumped his hard drive (never recovered) so we don't know what his sources were. But he planned and he practiced his plan for at least 3 months prior to acting.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Thanks for that note. We appreciate it.

Glenn

[Double Naught Spy]

Was George Hennard's attack sophisticated? He had a plan, executed it well, was calm as he walked around and shot people, effected quick magazine changes and was well enough prepared to stop those who attempted to rush him with gunfire. No doubt he knew where his bullets were as well.

[zombietactics]

I suppose another part of the question regards "how likely is a rampager a planner or possessed of some degree of sophistication?"

I researched the IHOP shooting, for instance, ... interviewed witnesses, took my own measurements ... not at all a planned attack, and absent anything which could be called "training". That also seems to be the case with the attack against Congresswoman Giffords.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Our local forces are taking into account rampage shooters with planned attacks in their response plans.

One problem is that it is pretty clear nothing saves the first 20 to 30 victims unless we allow carry in such locales and the legal carrier having some training is to better.

[Stevie-Ray]

What would be a guarantee?

At the least, each of the above passed a criminal background check.

True, but wouldn't the majority of jihadists pass one as well?

It scares me everyday to think about what we might be in store for over the next few years on that subject.

[MLeake]

Stevie-Ray, the thing about that is, what do you propose to do about it?

Most of us agree that RKBA should apply to the individual; that being the case, most of us should also agree that rights come with risks attached.

However, there is no right to training with any particular instructor, and I personally think it's a good idea for instructors to have at least a basic, good-faith screen in place for some subjects.

DHS now requires extra procedures be followed prior to providing flight training to a foreign national; I'm not sure such procedures would be practical to apply to firearms training.

However, even those procedures put in place would not prevent flight training being given to a US citizen would-be jihadist. The home-grown types are going to be a bigger problem, down the road.

But again, how do we counter that without giving up larger freedoms?