10-10-2017, 06:03 PM
Bad things are going to happen. People will die. No law or police force or security protocol in the world is going to change that. They can lessen the severity and reduce the frequency sure, but never truly eliminate the problem. People will always try to kill other people. Humans have been doing that since time began.
As a responsible person what you can do is own and carry the weapon that is most appropriate for your situation and skill level. You can train with your chosen weapon, be physically fit, train in other skills such as trauma medicine, high speed driving etc.. as practical for you personal situation. This will allow you to be able to respond effectively if or when you are in a life and death situation that requires one of these skill sets, mindset is very important too. People never rise to an occasion, they fall to their level of training.
As for trying to second guess the police and security personnel's response to the situation, that's an age old issue as well. Of course, knowing all the facts, how things turned out, and with all the time in the world on a comfortable couch with no distractions, we could come up with things they could have done better or differently. But to not have been there on the ground and try to second guess the guys that were is unjust. What I know of the police response seems to indicate a pretty disciplined force. From the perspective of an officer on the ground at the concert, I would view my responsibility as the immediate area around me, whether I had a long gun or not. They would not have known if there were other things planned at ground level such as additional shooters in the crowd, or suicide bombers, or IEDs by the exits or any number of other threats. It would have also been a job just to keep the crowd from trampling people to death. Handling the situation at hand, and leaving the response at the hotel the SWAT team or other officers in a better position to respond seems like a pretty good choice to me, especially in the time given. In a crowd of 22k, with only a small percentage of people being hit, it would not be far fetched to think the shooter in the hotel might not be the most dangerous threat, if you thought something else might be in store. You can't have your entire force focused on one threat and all trying to respond to the same thing. In a gunfight, just because your team takes fire from the north, doesn't mean you abandon your sector of fire to the south and swing your .50 to the north. You maintain your sector and let the guys facing north deal with it, so that you don't get a nasty surprise.
As a responsible person what you can do is own and carry the weapon that is most appropriate for your situation and skill level. You can train with your chosen weapon, be physically fit, train in other skills such as trauma medicine, high speed driving etc.. as practical for you personal situation. This will allow you to be able to respond effectively if or when you are in a life and death situation that requires one of these skill sets, mindset is very important too. People never rise to an occasion, they fall to their level of training.
As for trying to second guess the police and security personnel's response to the situation, that's an age old issue as well. Of course, knowing all the facts, how things turned out, and with all the time in the world on a comfortable couch with no distractions, we could come up with things they could have done better or differently. But to not have been there on the ground and try to second guess the guys that were is unjust. What I know of the police response seems to indicate a pretty disciplined force. From the perspective of an officer on the ground at the concert, I would view my responsibility as the immediate area around me, whether I had a long gun or not. They would not have known if there were other things planned at ground level such as additional shooters in the crowd, or suicide bombers, or IEDs by the exits or any number of other threats. It would have also been a job just to keep the crowd from trampling people to death. Handling the situation at hand, and leaving the response at the hotel the SWAT team or other officers in a better position to respond seems like a pretty good choice to me, especially in the time given. In a crowd of 22k, with only a small percentage of people being hit, it would not be far fetched to think the shooter in the hotel might not be the most dangerous threat, if you thought something else might be in store. You can't have your entire force focused on one threat and all trying to respond to the same thing. In a gunfight, just because your team takes fire from the north, doesn't mean you abandon your sector of fire to the south and swing your .50 to the north. You maintain your sector and let the guys facing north deal with it, so that you don't get a nasty surprise.