Crowded areas

[OhioGuy]

The latest news (the Portland commuter train) has kicked off new internet chatter about how "This could've been stopped if people had been armed" vs. "Thank goodness nobody had a gun that day!".

I'm curious to get an LE perspective, if we have any who are here on these forums.

I'm trying to imagine being in a crowded, sardine can-like environment where nobody is sure what's happening, people are screaming, someone is bleeding, nobody's sure what's happening next--and then someone pulls out their CCW.

Knowing how easy it can be to miss a target even under good conditions, without real stress, it seems the odds of the CCW leading to even more unintended injury are high. Trying to aim at someone who's surrounded by bystanders, while everyone is shoving and you're probably being jostled around?

If an officer were present, what would he/she do? What are they trained to do? And how much of that (legally and practically) could carry over to a civilian?

I'm an advocate for carrying, and for training to be as prepared as possible. But I'm trying really hard to imagine the scenario in which being armed here would have caused less injury, and not more...

Even if it all worked perfectly, one shot, the crazed knifer is dead--and now everyone's ears are ringing and people start stampeding because they think "Oh my God now the crazy guy has a gun."

What a tragedy

[DT Guy]

When I was an LEO, we were trained to move as needed to obtain a safe field of fire/backstop. We were trained to, among other things:

• Drop to a knee to shoot upwards into/through a target
• Raise our weapon and aim DOWN at a subject's head (actually used this once, though didn't have to fire)
• Slide sideways quckly to clear the backstop area

Even in the most crowded areas, with a bit of time and thought you can find ONE safe direction to fire, even if it's nearly straight up or down.


Larry

[g.willikers]

There are training methods to deal with this.
Not many people have access to it, though.
But it's there for those dedicated enough to find it.
If nothing else, and if there's a range that allows it, use a lot of targets clustered together with the "bad" guy in the middle to practice.
Unfortunately most folks would not likely be prepared to deal with the situation.

[DaleA]

The scenario outlined by the OP is one the anti-gun folk seeming love to go all hysterical over. (OP I am NOT referring to you.) Their concerns are:

1. The ‘Good Guy with a gun’ (GGWAG) will mindlessly gun down several innocent civilians (most of which will be women, children and minorities) in HIS (the ‘good guy with a gun’ will of course be a privileged white male (PWM)) blood lust to murder the ‘bad guy’, (who probably is stabbing folk because of a variety of legitimate concerns they are trying to bring ‘awareness’ about to the public at large.)
2. Besides shooting innocent bystanders the ‘GGWAG’ will undoubtedly trigger (pun intended) a chain reaction of other GGWAG wanna-bees to pull out their gats and start firing at random too with their semi-automatic, high capacity magazine clip assault weapons holding armor piercing, hollow point, exploding bullets.
3. It is extremely unlikely they will hit the ‘bad guy with a legitimate concern’ (BGWALC) who will continue stabbing folk.
4. When legitimate law enforcement folk arrive at the scene they will be faced with utter chaos and will have no choice but to hose down the entire area (including each other) until nothing in the area remains alive.

There are several absolutely critical points one must be aware of in these situations.
1. The GGWAG has absolutely no way of knowing who the BGWALC is. The fact that someone is hacking away with a machete at folk might be a clue but how many folk have received the necessary training to pick up on subtleties like this?
2. If the GGWAG somehow manages to stop the BGWALC (incredibly, very unlikely) how will the GGWAG know to quit shooting people?
3. Once the smell of blood is in the air how will other GGWAG be able to resist joining in and shooting people?
4. When law enforcement arrives how will they be able to tell the GGWAG from the BGWALC? Won’t they be forced to murder everyone in the area?

Well there have been a couple real life situations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_M..._mall_stabbing

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/10/colorado.shootings/

And as the second one shows the GGWAG can sometimes be a Gal too.

Common sense might not be all that common but maybe, just maybe, it isn't all that uncommon either.

[HiBC]

Chaos is often part of the offender's strategy.Count on it.

If you choose to be prepared for likely scenarios...good for you!

You might choose rapidly expanding,light for caliber projectiles to minimize over penetration ,like 115 gr 9 mm vs 140's.
You might spend some time in your commutes pondering "What would I do right now if....."
And figure out where your best percentages lie.
Life often does not deliver a clear,black and white,100% risk free choice.

If someone is getting fatally stabbed every two seconds in a crowded bus and you have your Glock on you,you may see 1/2 second where it looks 80% you won't hit anybody else.You can take it,or you can worry about how loud it will be and what happens next.

People may panic,true.The 10 foot radius around you may be filled with people staring in horror as people are being stabbed.They might be really grateful if you shot the bad guy. You MIGHT get cheers and a standing ovation.

I'm being a smart alec,but here is my point.

You can use reasonable fears to prepare..to have an alternative to panic..
Or,you can paralyze yourself with an infinite number of "What if's"
If anything ever does happen,it will likely be the unknown and unknowable when totally unexpected.
"Worry" is meditating a bad outcome,and it helps nothing.It may even be self fulfilling. Preparedness is different. Focus on "Bad guy is going down"
Its kind of like "Hope" Hope is being passive,patient,waiting on the couch for rescue by an outside force.Maybe the police will come save us. Hope.

In a really bad situation,everything you feared,everything you planned for,is likely to be different.
But here is the secret. You don't have to worry about all the things you worried about!! You only have to deal with THIS MOMENT .There isn't time for anything else.And either you will,or you won't.
If you want to watch cartoons in your head,try watching the ones where you are unarmed and helpless.

Ponder being a teacher at Sandy Hook,where the best you could do is use your body to soak up bullets as you see kids getting shot.

I'll take the fears and responsibilities of being armed with short odds over that helplessness in the face of horror .

[shafter]

Based on my LEO experience this would be a nightmare for even a highly trained operator. If the train/subway is moving it's going to be swaying a bit. So, now you have a moving platform, moving shooter, and moving passengers, some of whom might be jostling or even trying to tackle you when they see your gun, all wrapped up into tight quarters.

It's a bad spot to be trapped. Unless you can get to another car, or are close enough to tackle the shooter or shoot him at point blank range you might not have much of a choice other than making yourself really small between the seats. If your a few rows back you're out of the fight.

[OhioGuy]

DaleA, I got a good laugh out of that response because I have had conversations with people where they really do say all those things

One even said "how could you pull the trigger at the attacker if you don't know his whole story? How can you just him in that moment?" The weapon in his hand clearly offers no clues as to his "story" I suppose

[jdc1244]

I'm trying to imagine being in a crowded, sardine can-like environment where nobody is sure what's happening, people are screaming, someone is bleeding, nobody's sure what's happening next--and then someone pulls out their CCW.

And the logical question would be: why - particularly when the person pulling out his CCW doesn't know why.

There is also the very legitimate school of thought that the purpose of carrying a concealed firearm is for lawful self-defense, not to act in the capacity of ‘law enforcement.’

In such a situation, if one is carrying a concealed firearm, his appropriate recourse is to seek safety, not attempt to intervene, rendering the “this could've been stopped if people had been armed/thank goodness nobody had a gun that day” ‘argument’ moot.

[ShootistPRS]

If you can't see the perpetrator and if you have not witnessed the incident from the start you have no reason to draw your gun. If you can't know what is going on it is better to stay out of it. Now if you see a guy walking down the aisle of a commuter train shooting people and you are in the line of fire, you fear for your life, there is no place to go, and it is reasonable to an outsider that you are defending yourself then you can decide to use your gun in self defense. It is better than being shot and might stop the shooter. If the shooter sees you pull your gun and drops his you can't legally shoot the ex-shooter. You can hold him for the police within certain limits. You shouldn't use more force than is necessary or reasonable.

[HiBC]

I watched a vid of a Target or Wally world armed robbery. Bad guy headed into the shopping area with a handgun. Good guy draws and pursues. Bad guy;s wife shoots good guy from behind. Good guy dies.
Never assume bad guy is alone. If you are running through a crowd with a gun,don't assume you will be recognized as a good guy. Another good guy(cop?) might shoot you.

If you are on a bus or subway,a man 10 feet pulls a 10 in Henkel's Chef knife out,buries it in an innocent passenger(to your astonishment),pulls it out,grabs another person and cuts their throat,all in your plain sight,Thats your immediate reality.You have your S+W Shield,IWB. Its loaded with 115 gr Critical Defense because it was on the shelf.
You are figuring out which way to run.He buries the knife in another person .
Its all blood and screams.And eyes. A man tries to take the bad guy down .He doubles over,gutted.

Its up to you.You can run,get down in between the seats. That's what at least one former LEO would do while folks are hoping for an LEO.
He just cut a little red headed girl's throat.....
Its really good to think about why you carry.Where you fit in a civil society.

[OldMarksman]

If you can't see the perpetrator and if you have not witnessed the incident from the start you have no reason to draw your gun.

Almost always true.

If you can't know what is going on it is better to stay out of it.

True.

Never assume bad guy is alone.

Excellent advice.

...don't assume you will be recognized as a good guy.

Good thinking.

[JoeSixpack]

If I was one of the guys killed and I was armed, damn straight I'd have drawn my weapon.. further more I'd have no problem taking a shot.

Let's get real a minute here, Yes we wanna be aware of whats behind our target.
It's not ideal to take a shot with a innocent as the back drop.
But if someones about to get stabbed to death.. or more importantly ME, DAMN straight im rolling them bones and taking the shot.

Im not about to stand there and DIE because I MIGHT miss and it MIGHT hit someone unintended.

Besides if this guy has a knife that's a contact weapon unless he's good at throwing.. he's coming head on.. range is close odd's are pretty high you're gonna have good hits.

There is also the very legitimate school of thought that the purpose of carrying a concealed firearm is for lawful self-defense, not to act in the capacity of ‘law enforcement.’

In such a situation, if one is carrying a concealed firearm, his appropriate recourse is to seek safety, not attempt to intervene, rendering the “this could've been stopped if people had been armed/thank goodness nobody had a gun that day” ‘argument’ moot.

This is just me, I carry for defense of my self and those I care about.
However I would not sit by and watch someone be murdered, I would have to step in and help.. or try.

I would be racked with guilt and cowardice if I didn't.
I understand some have families and that would be your priority and I won't fault you.

But me personally I would no be able to live with my self if I did nothing.


I have seen plenty of petty crimes, mainly things like shop lifting.. I don't whip my gun out and stop them.. im not a cop but I could not turn a blind eye to murder.

[James K]

I firmly support the right of self-defense, but in a crowded area, with dozens of people running every which way, and revved up cops trying to figure out what is going on and maybe shooting wildly at nothing identifiable as the enemy, I really am not sure that having 50 or 100 armed civilians popping away at (what?) would help. It is one thing to think about you against one bad guy in a situation where you know exactly where and who the enemy is, and another to deal with a huge mob scene with 30 thousand innocent people and one doped up killer who does not even have an identifiable weapon. Sorry, folks, but even a police officer in plain clothes would be better advised to lay low and try to get others to do the same. In fact, those who chose to simply run for the nearest exit might have done as well for their own safety as the taking of any other action.

Sorry, Joe, but if I had been one of the armed police in that situation, and I saw you draw your gun, I would have killed you without a second thought or regrets. I am not going to wait to psychoanalyze you and figure out your motives - you have a gun and you are not identifiable as an officer, so I will kill you. Think that over.

Jim

[JoeSixpack]

They was on train, what exit? you gonna open the door and jump out?

It was pretty clear they knew who the BG was.. they intervened when he was harassing 2 women, not shouting into a faceless crowd.

BTW good luck when you goto prison after shooting a plain clothes cop.
I guess im glad you're not a police officer.

From what I heard on the news there was no police presence at least on that section of the train.. otherwise things would have probably went different.

[Mike38]

Seriously now, I have actually envisioned a scenario like this. Say you're packed in a subway train, and some nut starts slicing and dicing people with a knife. If you can work your way to him, get down prone, roll onto your back and put a shot up into his groin area, it should slow him down some. Or, if close enough, could you put the muzzle under his chin and shoot up into the ceiling?

[shafter]

If you're close enough a point blank shot could work, but I wouldn't recommend laying on your back in the aisle of a train car full of panicking people.

[Snyper]

One should do what they need to do to survive based on their first hand knowledge of what's actually happening.

All the internet speculation is pointless because everyone wants to construct a scenario that supports what they think should happen, whether it's realistic or not.

[Lohman446]

Your tool kit should include more than one tool. In this case a gun is not the most effective response

[Ton]

I'm LEO in a city of about half a million.

I've played these types of situations out in my head repeatedly, and unfortunately there is no one size fits all answer for this question. There are also no good answers. The reality is people are going to get hurt/die and no amount of training can transform the situation into a Hollywood scenario where the BG dies and all good guys go home safely. There are so many variables in these mass killing situations that being totally prepared for situation A could be useless for situation B. So you've mentally rehearsed what you would do if someone came into the movie theater and started shooting, now what about the guy who starts stabbing people on the elevator? The guy who drives a school bus through a crowd? What happens when you are standing in line waiting to check out at Walmart and a flaming Honda Civic blows through the front doors? (I've personally seen that one). Drunk driver? Murder attempt? Suicide attempt? Vehicle problems?

Common sense will dictate. Anything you can possibly imagine COULD happen, but there are zero guarantees about what WILL happen.

If you are close enough to the situation as it evolves to make an informed decision, make it. If you aren't, gain distance. If the situation changes while you are trying to gain distance and you become more informed (ie someone tries to attack you with a deadly weapon), make a informed decision.

Could police show up on scene at the worst possible moment and decide you are a lethal threat? Yes. Is it likely? I would say no. I've been to a lot of shootings after the fact, but the only ones I was present for were the ones we were involved in. For the most part, people tend to do a quick scan of the area to make sure police aren't nearby before engaging in felonious activity, though this isn't always the case (Miami).

Could you miss and hit someone innocent? Absolutely. I can consistently hit a human sized target at the range with my Glock 17 at 50 yards. In high stress situations I've missed moving targets at 15 feet with a long gun.

Again, there are no easy answers. People may get hurt or killed if you don't intervene. You may hurt or kill people if you do. People may hurt or kill you if you don't intervene. People may hurt or kill you if you do. You may never sleep 8 hours again if you don't.

The one piece of "training" advice I do feel is applicable in MOST of these situations if you decide to engage: draw, stop the threat, scan, HOLSTER. The longer you stand there with a gun in your hand the higher likelihood something bad is going to happen.

[K_Mac]

Ton, that is an intelligent and well reasoned response. Thank you.

[Archie]

1. The very first indication there's a problem is when someone starts screaming. If one is extremely lucky, one will be close enough to the problem to ascertain the situation and far enough NOT to be the first victim.

2. The very first indication one is armed is when one's sidearm appears. My thought is to keep it hidden until the required moment. (Some woman may be screaming because her child is choking. This will require assistance but not a firearm.) One does not want to alert the villain prematurely.

3. Somewhat out of chronological order, but one must have developed more than a passing familiarity with the handgun utilized. More than simply making minimal standards on a repetitive qualification course at fixed intervals AND more than simply firing a silly number of shots within a limited period of time. In any case, without - as far as can be done - a three minute preparation time to make sure arm is loaded and chambered, mantra is chanted and death song is sung, as applicable.

Knowing how to shoot is the best antidote for panic shooting.

Connected to this is the foresight to ensure proper working condition for the sidearm and ammunition in question.

4. Be careful not to be trampled by the panicked 'by standers'. Obviously, a responder will move toward the problem rather than away. Swimming upstream, so to speak.

5. A shot fired in a confined area (like a light rail or subway car, or perhaps the connecting halls of a mall) is going to be loud. This will not calm an extant panic. Be aware.

6. Shots fired must be minimal. The six-shot burst - so familiar to standard qualification courses, or the thirty-shot burst, so beloved by game shooters and shooting game course designers - are contraindicated. Every shot carries with it the possibility of an inadvertent disaster. More shots fired are more chances of disaster.

7. The idea of 'they won't get me' carrying the assumption everyone else is expendable is both deplorable and ill-advised. It carries the stamp of moral emptiness and narcissism, AND engenders the very real possibility of legal charges of culpable negligence and civil actions for wrongful death or injury.

[TailGator]

I have often considered crowded situations, and thought that going to a crouched or kneeling position would have at least some potential of giving me a shot with a safe background. I was kind of reassured to read in the first reply that a similar idea was part of DT Guy's training.

[James K]

A partial correction. While the question was specifically about Portland, I had just seen a replay of Manchester, which was a different situation and that was on my mind when I replied. Still, it does go to show that there are many different situations and no absolute "correct" action to be taken for all of them.

In Portland, the bad guy was close enough that his knife was the dangerous weapon; in Manchester, the bag of explosives was an area weapon. The best response to one would not apply to the other.

I agree that in a one-on-one confrontation, a self defense firearm may be the best, probably the only, good response. But in a mass panic, with police carrying automatic weapons, a civilian hauling out his Glock and spraying the area will not be a good idea, no matter what some gung-ho gunslingers may believe.

Jim

[ShootistPRS]

I don't know any concealed carriers that would "pull out their Glock and start spraying the area". Most would take a carefully aimed shot - probably more so than a policeman.

[jackstrawIII]

Sorry, Joe, but if I had been one of the armed police in that situation, and I saw you draw your gun, I would have killed you without a second thought or regrets. I am not going to wait to psychoanalyze you and figure out your motives - you have a gun and you are not identifiable as an officer, so I will kill you. Think that over.

This goes through my head constantly whenever I think of these types of situations. I'm a firm believer that my guns are for "self" defense (including me and mine). Any other action is secondary.

Here's what I would attempt to do if I was in such an unfortunate situation:

1. My primary responsibility is to myself and my family. Step one is make sure I and they are in a safe location (behind me, behind cover, running towards cover, etc).

2. Once that is done, I try to assess the threat and whether I can confidently stop the threat a significant amount of time before a LEO could do the same. I'd rather let an LEO do the job if one is present or soon to be present. But, if there's no LEO in sight and I think I can safely address the threat, maybe I would.

Hard to say for sure tho.