Being an Active Shooter
By: Glenn E. Meyer, PhD
Note: The author was born in New York City
and is full professor in the Psychology Department at Trinity
University in San Antonio, Texas. He received his doctorate in 1975
and has written numerous professional articles and books in the
areas of visual perception, cognition and statistics. He recently
has been studying the influence of weapons type used in defensive
gun usages on simulated jury decisions. A convert to the world of
defensive firearms, he has been an NTI practitioner & has studied
with several well known trainers.
I was asked
recently by my campus police department if I wanted to take part in
an Active Shooter training scenario. The department takes firearms
training very seriously and qualifies several times a year. I have
shot with them at qualification and also have served on their search
committees for new officers and promotions. Of course, I jumped at
the chance. I prepared by reading up on ambush techniques and
picking the brains of NTI and Insight list folks.
After
Columbine and with the threat of terrorism, we now know that
containment of threat tactics may not always serve. The officers on
the spot may have to deal with, engage and search for an active
shooter. For a campus department to train for such is exemplary.
My focus is on
what happened and what did we learn from me being an active
shooter? Here we go:
First Day:
We ran five
teams of three officers each into a nest of what would be offices.
Basically the training officer wanted to practice entry. It was moi
and another officer as the BGs – together or singularly. We had a
fully auto paintball gun and a pump paint ball shotgun. Officers
had paint ball handguns with numbers of rounds corresponding to
their duty load. I never used the fully auto option on the gun. We
had sixty rounds. If I were an active shooter, I would have an
AR-15 with 30 round mags so the capacity was in line with reality.
I would probably have a Glock of some sort as a handgun and a
smaller hidden BUG. Thus, I carried an Airsoft backup pistol.
I wore a paint
ball vest that simulated body armor. The site was a nest of
interconnected officers with cinder block walls (cover), some teller
like windows and internal passages. Many of our buildings are like
that, with lots of good solid stone or brick cover. We had sound
effects of gun shots, fog and screaming people. The responding
officers had to enter through a doorway.
What we found
out is that if we were aggressive on initial entry we had them. We
set up so one person had them on initial fire and the second would
get them in a crossfire. The first had an initial covered position
or a surprise rush. We eliminated some teams completely. When we
pulled back and let them form up, it was mixed. We got in some
rounds, took some down and then were eliminated ourselves.
In the last on
the first day, I was the lone BG. Discussing this with the training
officer, we laid a table across the entry way, a couple of feet into
the room, so it was not immediately seen on entry. The idea was
produce a fatal funnel. The guys bunched up and I got two before
the third responded with rapid fire that drove me back and I took a
belly shot and a hand shot. I decided I was down and called it.
All were very
positive. Some of them had not had significant FOF and found it
very useful. I was declared a good BG. Some of the guys for the
next day were SWAT certified and vowed revenge.
Day 2:
On the second
day we varied off the entry level ambush. They had enough of that.
We did various hostage surrenders, bystanders to be saved, find a
nut (moi) who has given up but is in a hidey hole crying (but is
still with guns) and other things that they had laid out in the
lesson plan.
The last run
was an entry for a team (one shift) that had not made entry against
opposition. They were told that if they were under significant fire
and had no reason to enter, they needed to back off. I was again,
the lone madman but was specifically told to be aggressive by the
chief. Entering a nest of offices is dangerous. However, the heat
of the moment led them to enter. Specifically, the lead officer was
annoyed at me because of previous clashes. That made him rash.
Again, I set up an obstacle to delay a rapid entry and form another
fatal funnel. I shot the first officer and the other two took
reasonable cover. They did make a mistake as they forgot a passage
way that I could control as they tried to flank me. I flanked them
instead. Thus they were eliminated.
Things Learned
by Me:
Tactically, I
was pleased that my training as a civilian stood me in good stead.
Use of angles, cover, aimed fire, backup guns all came to the fore.
Shooting over the top of cover (I had to once) gets you shot in the
head - ouch. I have to thank my previous FOF experiences with Karl
Rehn, OPS, and the NTI for giving me an inner strength to face the
attacks. I remember my first run at the NTI. I was sucking air
like a bellows and not breathing. In ATSA village, I was vaporized
in the bank robbery. Thus, facing repeated intense attacks from the
entry teams, I knew I could do it. I remembered to breathe. The
stress inoculation of training is incredibly useful. Another point
from training is to stay in the fight. I switched hands and guns,
ignored painful whacks if it wasn’t in a seemingly lethal area.
Aggression counts. I came away with a sense that even if faced with
several armed opponents, in a life or death struggle, one could
prevail or do significant damage to the other side. My ATSA village
experience, esp. my team’s debacle in the bank, aided me in this.
What Did the
Officers Learn?
The level of
training varied. Some of them had SWAT training. Some just had
standard LEO training. I think they took away:
1. Use of
cover and avoiding the fatal funnel. The inability to get to cover
caused many of the teams to have very difficult times. If this
year’s NTI participants recall, we had some discussion of shooting
at an opponent’s knee as it was visible/vulnerable. In one
scenario, the officers were engaging my partner and lo and behold
there was a knee and inner thigh coming around a door. I remembered
my lesson and shot it.
Be prepared to
take hits. In training, have a plan to get those who are seriously
hit out of the fight. Let the teams deal with causalities and the
shock of loss.
2. You really
have to identify your targets. I was shot once when I was just a
hostage. We had one officer throw open a door and just hose a
stream of fire down the hall away as he saw movement. Whistles blew
and he was stopped. He was reminded that this was a hostage rescue
and he had no knowledge of targets and what was behind what he hit.
In fact, he was shooting at nothing. Neither of us was there.
I think some
officers needed clarification on the mission of FOF training. It’s
not a game where you win by killing the aggressor. A win is having
the best outcome from a law enforcement point of view.
3. Learn to
negotiate doorways. Some teams pied really well. Others did not.
That’s why this practice was essential for them. One officer crept
up to the door of a room that I was in. I saw his long gun muzzle
stick way out before I saw his body. I shot the barrel. In another
instance, it was discovered that I was in a room behind furniture.
Perhaps, verbal contact should have been initiated by the officers
from behind cover? However, one officer decided to leap across the
door way. He would have been getting a buttocks transplant in real
life. I don’t think he appreciate the big pink paintball splashes
on his tush. He was the guy who later acted rashly.
4. If faced
with serious opposition armed with serious guns, do you withdraw and
try to contain? We had the equivalent of semi-auto long arms; the
officers learned whether it was wise to try to enter or back off and
contain the situation. This is an interesting problem after
Columbine. Either two of us were set up or one of us. We knew what
we were doing. The officers heard what sounded like an active
shooter. A couple of teams actually moved quite well tactically,
pinned us and contained us. The best were two women officers.
5. The school
has unarmed officers. They do parking tickets and the like. They
were run through a scenario once. The rationale was that they might
be with an armed officer who then gets shot. Should they pick up
the officer’s gun and stay in the fight? They needed some gun
basics: the four rules, use your sights, etc.
6. Leave your
ego at the door. One rule of the NTI is NO WHINING. Without going
into a long story, one officer who was self-proclaimed as an expert
shot and tactician was rudely eliminated as he was the one who acted
rashly. Needless to say, he did not take it well and still doesn’t
several weeks later. There are reasons for such behavior – lack of
personality strength to be able to learn from one’s mistakes, loss
of face and position in a dominance hierarchy or perhaps realizing
that he could be so easily killed left him in existential crisis. I
found being rudely eliminated at the NTI to be a learning experience
but I’m not a self-proclaimed master tactician. Thanks to some NTI
members for helping me sort this out. I wonder if training officers
should look for such behavior and plan some debriefing.
Better dead in
training then being really dead. I certainly learned quite a bit at
the NTI seminar from my screw ups. I got blown up by a suicide
bomber, shot in the fatal funnel and last took a chestful of
Simmunitions from an MP-5 when I stupidly charged out a door.
That hurt. It
drew blood as I just had a tee shirt over my fat belly and chest.
However, the NTI rules were no whining or egos. One of my team
mates caught a Sims round right in his check from that one weird
shot the skirted the edge of his mask. Didn’t whine.
7. Little
things:
a. Flashlight
position – The FBI hold didn’t fool me. Bang
b. Being
yelled at by police to surrender was intimidating.
c. Buildings – Do architects
consider how wonderfully they set up ambushes with all those pillars
and passageways? Should they?
To conclude –
The experience was very useful to me personally. I hope it helped
the officers. It does make me worry that with the current attitudes
in most of the country; at best officers will be playing catch up
when such incidents occur. They will put their lives at risks. In
reality, our school can't defend against an active shooter quick
enough to prevent 10's of causalities unless it is pure luck that
the shooter is spotted on the way in. If the BG’s are set and the
first responders only have handguns to contend with folks using
semi-auto long guns – the officers are in for severe difficulty. It
is not hard to read about entry techniques and counter them. First
responders will have a terrible time if there is any competency in
their opponents. Without individuals who are armed, the initial
attacks will be killing zones for the BGs. Schools in the USA will
never allow armed teachers for various socio-political and liability
issues. If serious attacks were planned against schools, it would
be a bloodbath. We once had a discussion of the university response
to a stalking incident with someone who potentially could be
dangerous. We were told bluntly that the institution and risk
management experts had calculated that it would be easier to pay off
a faculty and family if you took some action against the school for
non-protection than to pay off the stalker if he or she sued for
harassment or an innocent if you accidentally put a round into
such. Most companies have similar policies because of the potential
liabilities. It is a philosophical flaw in modern life that one
must be a victim. I wish that Presidents, Governors, and
legislators of different types might realize that a first line of
defense against such actions starts with the armed citizen. It has
been shown to be effective in shooting incidents here and abroad.
Yes, the one teacher facing a squad is in a difficult situation.
Faced with three active shooters, maybe not or at least you can
seriously degrade them. Unfortunately, for some politicians, having
firearms is about hunting with an O/U shotgun. I don’t expect to
fight a team of terrorist skeet or geese anytime soon.