4 ms·

I'm trying to explain why de-escalation is not the preferred tactical response from the police when it comes to active shooter scenarios. I think it makes sense

by rhcom2 7y ago

I'm trying to explain why de-escalation is not the preferred tactical response from the police when it comes to active shooter scenarios. I think it makes sense from a law enforcement point of view to take every threat as credible until proven otherwise. According the FBI there's been 250 between 2000-2017. https://www.fbi.gov/about/partnerships/office-of-partner-engagement/active-shooter-incidents-graphics https://www.fbi.gov/about/partnerships/office-of-partner-eng... I also think it's important to understand why the police respond like they do. It isn't arbitrary, it's statistically suppose to save lives, but SWATing is intentionally abusing that response.

tastroder 7y ago
250 incidents in 17 years seems to hardly be an explanation to rule out de-escalation by default when interacting with the general population. Even in these cases, it's not like SWATting is a new phenomenon. As an alternative: Maybe invest in proper training for LEOs instead of military grade equipment, that would at least decrease the frequency of stuff like [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Wichita_swatting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Wichita_swatting
- dmix 7y ago
  You mean surrounding a house with 20 guys with AR-15 rifles, with the right to shoot any moment the persons hands aren’t where various officers yelling at him at the same times wants them to be, isn’t a good deescalation strategy?
traderjane 7y ago
> I think it makes sense from a law enforcement point of view to take every threat as credible until proven otherwise. Doesn't that strike you as something people might say but never do? Kind of like innocence until proven guilty? I mean of course the state and its employees don't think like that.
FireBeyond 7y ago
> I'm trying to explain why de-escalation is not the preferred tactical response from the police when it comes to active shooter scenarios. As a first responder who has trained with, and documented photographically, multiple active shooter scenarios (training, at high schools, community colleges and even malls) and responded to more than one... These scenarios are not active shooter events. That is someone well, actively shooting. Usually with confirmation from 911 dispatchers ("we have gunshots in the background of the call"). Usually these situations are highly Hollywood-ized. One caller described "I can see from the street through the window - they have the whole family on their knees, hands on heads and have guns to their heads, about to execute them all". More worryingly are stories of sending quantities of drugs (often possession, not even supply levels) to a residence - that shouldn't be able to evoke a no-knock SWAT response in the first place.

by rhcom2 7y ago

tastroder 7y ago

250 incidents in 17 years seems to hardly be an explanation to rule out de-escalation by default when interacting with the general population. Even in these cases, it's not like SWATting is a new phenomenon. As an alternative: Maybe invest in proper training for LEOs instead of military grade equipment, that would at least decrease the frequency of stuff like [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Wichita_swatting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Wichita_swatting

dmix 7y ago
You mean surrounding a house with 20 guys with AR-15 rifles, with the right to shoot any moment the persons hands aren’t where various officers yelling at him at the same times wants them to be, isn’t a good deescalation strategy?

traderjane 7y ago

> I think it makes sense from a law enforcement point of view to take every threat as credible until proven otherwise. Doesn't that strike you as something people might say but never do? Kind of like innocence until proven guilty? I mean of course the state and its employees don't think like that.

FireBeyond 7y ago

> I'm trying to explain why de-escalation is not the preferred tactical response from the police when it comes to active shooter scenarios. As a first responder who has trained with, and documented photographically, multiple active shooter scenarios (training, at high schools, community colleges and even malls) and responded to more than one... These scenarios are not active shooter events. That is someone well, actively shooting. Usually with confirmation from 911 dispatchers ("we have gunshots in the background of the call"). Usually these situations are highly Hollywood-ized. One caller described "I can see from the street through the window - they have the whole family on their knees, hands on heads and have guns to their heads, about to execute them all". More worryingly are stories of sending quantities of drugs (often possession, not even supply levels) to a residence - that shouldn't be able to evoke a no-knock SWAT response in the first place.