Friday, September 26, 2014

FBI Report on Active Shooter Incidents (not Mass Shootings)

While I wanted to post it on my blog, (the best blog discussing events in East Asia) , I thought Mikeb30200 may be a better place for the article.

By ERIC TUCKER
Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) - The number of shootings in which a gunman wounds or kills multiple people has increased dramatically in recent years, with the majority of attacks in the last decade occurring at a business or a school, according to an FBI report released Wednesday.
The study focused on 160 "active shooter incidents" between 2000 and 2013. Those are typically defined as cases in which a gunman in an attack shoots or attempts to shoot people in a populated area.
The goal of the report, which excluded shootings that are gang and drug related, was to compile accurate data about the attacks and to help local police prepare for or respond to similar killings in the future, federal law enforcement officials said.
"These incidents, the large majority of them, are over in minutes. So it's going to have to be a teaching and training of the best tactics, techniques and procedures to our state and local partners," said James F. Yacone, an FBI assistant director who oversees crisis response and was involved in the report.
According to the report, an average of six shooting incidents occurred in the first seven years that were studied. That average rose to more than 16 per year in the last seven years of the study. That period included the 2012 shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, as well as last year's massacre at the Washington Navy Yard in which a gunman killed 12 people before dying in a police shootout.
The majority of the shootings occurred either at a business or a school, university or other education facility, according to the study, conducted in conjunction with Texas State University. Other shootings have occurred in open spaces, on military properties, and in houses of worship and health care facilities.
A total of more than 1,000 people were either killed or wounded in the shootings. In about one-quarter of the cases, the shooter committed suicide before the police arrived. The gunman acted alone in all but two of the cases. The shooters were female in at least six of the incidents.
Not all of the cases studied involved deaths or even injuries. In one 2006 case in Joplin, Missouri, a 13-year-old boy brought a rifle and handgun into a middle school, but his rifle jammed after he fired one shot. The principal then escorted the boy out of school and turned him over to the police.
Law enforcement officials who specialize in behavioral analysis say the motives of gunmen vary but many have a real, or perceived, personally held grievance that they feel mandates an act of violence. Though it's hard to say why the number of shootings has increased, officials say they believe many shooters are inspired by past killings and the resulting notoriety.
"The copycat phenomenon is real," said Andre Simons of the FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit. "As more and more notable and tragic events occur, we think we're seeing more compromised, marginalized individuals who are seeking inspiration from those past attacks."
Beyond studying the shootings, the FBI has promoted better training for local law enforcement, invariably the first responders.

37 comments:

  1. "Being prepared to use force also means having the equipment needed to act effectively. The data clearly support equipping officers with patrol rifles."

    "Police have, generally, done an excellent job responding to active shooter events quickly. Despite the dramatic improvement in police response since the Columbine High School shooting incident, attacks that result in high numbers of casualties continue. The five highest casualty events since 2000 happened despite police arriving on scene in about 3 minutes. Clearly, fast and effective police response comprises only part of the answer to limiting the damage done during these attacks.
    Also important are the actions that civilians take to protect themselves during the 3 or more minutes that it takes the police to arrive. Civilians need to be trained about what to do if one of these attacks occurs. A variety of resources are available at no cost. Federal agencies, including both the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, endorse the use of the teaching technique of Run, Hide, Fight to explain to civilians how they can protect themselves and others around them.[8] Police departments and the communities they serve should work together to implement this training."

    http://leb.fbi.gov/2014/january/active-shooter-events-from-2000-to-2012

    Hopefully whenever a school gets the vapors when the subject of having a rifle stored at the school for police use, this report will help them see reason. The one thing that this report shows is that a big factor determining minimizing casualties is response time. Which argues for what everyone lambasted the NRA about when they advocated for having someone in every school able to respond to an active shooter. In other words, a good guy with a gun.
    It can be a police officer, or a school employee.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Reason has a very enlightening article explaining that this "mass shootings on the rise" notion is based largely on people treating "active shooter incident" and "mass shooting" as synonyms (note that the title of the FBI report itself says nothing about "mass shootings"--it's about "active shooter incidents").

    They ain't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wrong, Kurt.

      "According to the report, an average of six shooting incidents occurred in the first seven years that were studied. That average rose to more than 16 per year in the last seven years of the study."

      If we were simply comparing apples to oranges, TS would have been all over it.

      Delete
    2. Nope, Mikeb, I remain correct. As Reason points out, the FBI report's coverage of "active shooter incidents" (as distinct from mass shootings) include cases in which no one is even wounded:

      Another major difference: Rather than basing its definition on how many people were killed, the FBI report focuses on homicidal intent. If the perp only wounds his victims, or if he doesn't even manage to do that, he still gets counted. Fewer than half of the incidents in the FBI report qualify as mass shootings under [James Alan] Fox's definition.

      I have a great deal of respect for TS, but I reject the notion that he's the only one who can point out faulty comparisons.

      Delete
    3. I haven't put effort into looking at numbers of mass shooting to judge whether or not they are on the rise. But it is quite clear this FBI report is not on mass shootings, so you shouldn't title your post as such.

      Though if they were on the rise, it wouldn't be shocking considering how these events number in the single digits (or just above) per year, and there are known motivations for publicity in some of these cases, making copycat incidents quite plausible.

      But, you guys need to show something "on the rise" because you keep getting hammered by the pesky fact of dropping murder and violent crime rates. If not "mass shootings", then maybe "shootings of women by bearded men on Tuesdays".

      Thanks for the props, Kurt.

      Delete
    4. Kurt, did you not even read my comment? I'll repeat it and explain it to you, ok?

      "According to the report, an average of six shooting incidents occurred in the first seven years that were studied. That average rose to more than 16 per year in the last seven years of the study."

      This report is talking about the rise in "shooting incidents," defined as they are, over the years. The difference between "mass shootings" and "shooting incidents" has nothing to do with it as long as we're not comparing one to the other.

      TS has a minor and typically nit picking point about the post title.

      Delete
    5. Mikeb, you're quoting the AP article, which suffers from the same confusion I mentioned in my first comment on this post.

      Delete
    6. MikeB: "TS has a minor and typically nit picking point about the post title."

      Like how it's wrong? I know, how nit picky of me.

      MikeB: "This report is talking about the rise in "shooting incidents," defined as they are, over the years. The difference between "mass shootings" and "shooting incidents" has nothing to do with it as long as we're not comparing one to the other."

      But you're confusing one for the other. So I'd say it "has something to do with it" and in the name of accuracy and honesty, you are now informed enough to update the title.

      Delete
    7. I'll do that right now, but will you at least concede my point that the report is not guilty of comparing one thing to a different thing?

      Delete
    8. . . . but will you at least concede my point that the report is not guilty of comparing one thing to a different thing?

      The report? No, the FBI report makes very clear that it's about "active shooter incidents," rather than "mass shootings." It's much of the media coverage that conflates the two. As Reason points out, the Daily Beast article is the most hilarious in that regard, saying "mass shooting" in every sentence, literally. Ah--"progressive" journalism at its finest.

      Delete
    9. Thanks, Mike.

      Yes, the report is not guilty of that. Many of the reporters who reported on the report were the guilty party.

      Delete
  3. Wow, 16 incidents a year in a nation of 300,000,000 people. How many people are struck by lightning per year?

    -LawProfessor

    ReplyDelete
  4. Huh. Attempted mass killing in OK kept down to 1 murder thanks to COO of the company carrying a gun at work. Doubt he expected to need it, but I'd say the survivor is glad he had it.

    On the plus side, you can add one more gunshot death to Oklahoma.

    ReplyDelete
  5. One of the most important incidents in minimizing casualties (Columbine) was the shooter had to stop and reload. At least 6 kids got to run to safety because he had to stop to reload. Read the eyewitness accounts and watch their interviews on the then media. Proof that smaller magazine size does/will save lives. You gun loons cry "they are taking my rights away!" at the littlest things like gun safes, or magazine capacity even though those little have proven to save lives. That's why you are idiot, kill loving, gun loons.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "One of the most important incidents in minimizing casualties (Columbine) was the shooter had to stop and reload. At least 6 kids got to run to safety because he had to stop to reload."

      I think you might be a bit confused there Anon. Can you cite a source for your assertion. There were actually two shooters at Columbine, plus it took place right in the middle of the first federal assault weapon and magazine ban. I think you might be referring to a different event.

      Delete
    2. Good point about magazine size, but that really doesn't enter into this discussion.

      Delete
    3. These threads get off topic all the time and it was SS who brought up minimizing casualties. Yes, I thought it was a good point and one rarely brought up when the gun loons talk about minimizing casualties. SS, there were books and interviews by the actual witnesses and kids who were in the shooting. Get educated.

      Delete
    4. "SS, there were books and interviews by the actual witnesses and kids who were in the shooting. Get educated."

      Well Anon, it does help if both people in the debate are on the same page. You were a bit off on your information. As I said before, it didn't sound like Columbine because you only mentioned one shooter.
      I'm assuming you're referring to something like this article regarding Sandy Hook, where there was only one shooter.

      "As many as a half-dozen first graders may have survived Adam Lanza's deadly shooting spree at Sandy Hook Elementary School because he stopped firing briefly, perhaps either to reload his rifle or because it jammed, according to law enforcement officials familiar with the events."

      http://articles.courant.com/2012-12-23/news/hc-lanza-gunjam-20121222_1_rifle-school-psychologist-classroom

      "Based on initial statements from surviving children and the fact that unfired bullets from Lanza's rifle were found on the ground, detectives suspect that some students were able to run to safety when Lanza stopped firing, probably for a short period of time, the officials said.
      It is possible that Lanza, who reloaded the rifle frequently, mishandled or dropped a magazine and unfired bullets fell to the floor, they said."

      "But it also is possible, they said, that the mechanism that fed bullets into the rifle jammed, causing Lanza to remove the magazine and clear the weapon. Unfired bullets could have fallen to the classroom floor during that process as well, law enforcement officials said."

      "The authorities have learned generally from the children who ran away that something may have happened to Lanza's rifle that caused him to stop firing. The substance of the statements, which are not entirely consistent, is that a piece of the weapon, probably a magazine holding live bullets, was dropped or fell to the classroom floor.
      Investigators have decided not to formally interview the children, based on advice from Yale child psychologists. Given the chaotic nature of the scene, it is also possible that some children escaped while Lanza was shooting others in the room."

      In my limited experience with the AR family of weapon, I've never experienced rounds falling out of a magazine by dropping it on the ground.
      However, loose rounds laying on the ground ARE an indication of a feeding malfunction of some sort and the shooter performing what is called immediate action where the magazine is removed from the weapon chamber cleared and then reloaded.
      This is usually caused by a weapon that isn't properly lubricated, or not kept clean.

      Delete
    5. I'll never consider giving up my "high capacity" (gun ban zealot-speak for non-reduced capacity) magazines until there are eleven or fewer "gun control" advocates in the world.

      One might encounter them all at once, after all, and one needs to be properly equipped to deal with them.

      Delete
    6. Sarge: "This is usually caused by a weapon that isn't properly lubricated, or not kept clean."

      Careful, they'll want to ban lube now.

      They will also ignore all evidence that this wasn't just a simple reload, just as they do for Tucson.

      Delete
  6. This is typical nit picking diversion on your part. It doesn't matter if the mass killer stops shooting momentarily due to the need to change mags or because one of them jams. When the shooting stops people escape.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A normal reload is a considerably shorter time period than a malfunction. As we know, the Newtown shooter practiced tactical reloads, which meant he wasn’t even empty while reloading (plus he had two backup handguns). People should not leave a place of concealment or cover because the shooting stops for a few seconds. If a person is not in a good place of concealment or cover (often the case), the best tactic is to be running the whole time, as most people escape mass shootings while the shooter is shooting at other people. People do not only escape when the shooting stops.

      Delete
    2. In several of the high profile cases, there were reports of people escaping during the magazine change. In Tucson, the shooter was stopped during one.

      It's really annoying that you keep repeating Lanza practiced tactical magazine changes, as if this applies to most of the nuts who do these shooting sprees. It doesn't.

      Delete
    3. "It's really annoying that you keep repeating Lanza practiced tactical magazine changes, as if this applies to most of the nuts who do these shooting sprees."

      Lanza didn't get brought up till Anon introduced it, though he even got that wrong by thinking it was Columbine. And from what I read from several sources when I made my comment above, I wonder how many of those changes were "tactical" and how many were the result of feeding issues with the rifle.

      Delete
    4. Mike: "In Tucson, the shooter was stopped during one."

      That was not a simple magazine change. That was a jam.

      MikeB: "It's really annoying that you keep repeating Lanza practiced tactical magazine changes, as if this applies to most of the nuts who do these shooting sprees. It doesn't."

      It doesn't, but it could. Tactical mag swaps are an easy way to cancel out your idea of limiting magazine sizes for spree shooters. Carrying extra guns is another easy way (something which is done quite often). Plus you way WAY over estimate the value of mag swaps in these situations. You keep pointing back to two incidents which weren’t even mag swaps.

      Sarge: “I wonder how many of those changes were "tactical" and how many were the result of feeding issues with the rifle.”

      That could be. Maybe he was having problems with the gun the whole time. Though I think he would have went to one of his backups if he had 5 or 6 feed loading issues with the AR.

      Delete
    5. "It doesn't, but it could."

      You are unbelievable. "It could???" Really? All the spree shooters from here on in COULD be extremely trained and practiced in efficient gun handling including magazine changing. Is that your argument, they could?

      Delete
    6. Sure. It's easy to realize that you don't have a run a gun dry before changing mags. This isn't about being "extremely trained"- it is simply putting in a new magazine before you get to slide lock. If someone is really concerned about that time changing magazines, they could make this slight effort. Now, you could argue that shooters don’t do this too often- and maybe because mag changes are not the big deal you make them out to be. But it is a pretty easy effort that cancels out what you think you’re gaining by putting prohibitions on magazines. And then there’s bringing multiple guns, which I noticed you have nothing to say about.

      Delete
    7. Sure. It's easy to realize that you don't have a run a gun dry before changing mags. This isn't about being "extremely trained"- it is simply putting in a new magazine before you get to slide lock.

      Back in my younger days, before I outgrew the urge to be "tacticool" in all things, I loaded tracers (yep--they make tracers in .45 ACP) as my second-to-last round, to give myself a signal to change mags right when the first mag has emptied, but before the slide has locked back--even if in the chaos of a gunfight, I lost count of the rounds expended.

      I don't bother with that kinda thing any more, but it's one easy way to keep your reloads "tactical."

      Delete
    8. "even if in the chaos of a gunfight," What gunfight is that, Kurt? The one in your imagination?

      Delete
    9. TS, I never understood your stubborn insistence that magazine changes don't matter. Lanza would have had to change 15 times if he's had only 10-rounders. As it was he changed only 5 times.

      When a guy is pulling the trigger and sending lead down on his targets, any interruption, no matter how brief would be welcome. Am I wrong about that? When firing the next round requires only another trigger pull, that next round is almost guaranteed. But when it requires a magazine change, there's at least a momentary delay plus the chance of fumbling the mag, dropping it, anything could happen, all of which are better than another trigger pull and another round fired.

      Delete
    10. What gunfight is that, Kurt? The one in your imagination?

      Ever use seat belts, Mikeb? Have your kids use them? Why, the car accident in your imagination? What's with the fire extinguisher in the house--got a fire in your imagination?

      The entire point of preparing for terrible eventualities that you hope never occur is to be able to deal effectively with them if they do. Not because it's likely, but because that if that unlikely eventuality does come about, the consequences of not being prepared are too terrible to contemplate.

      Delete
    11. Typical gun loons deny the fact that smaller magazine capacity can save lives.

      Delete
    12. Speaking of Constitutionally protected, shall not be infringed magazines, it appears that I will soon be able to feed my Vepr shotgun more than a mere bite at a time.

      Ah--to hear the anguished bleating of the bed-wetting cud-chewers who don't like private citizens owning magazines, except those of artificially and illegitimately limited capability.

      Delete
    13. "shall not be infringed magazines." Hahahahahahaha

      Delete
    14. "Ever use seat belts, Mikeb? Have your kids use them? Why, the car accident in your imagination? What's with the fire extinguisher in the house--got a fire in your imagination?"

      I don't know about you, but when I put my seat belt on I don't give it another thought. I don't carry a fire extinguisher with me everywhere I go. Comparing those two safety tools to guns is ridiculous. How much time do you spend practicing with your seat belt or cleaning your fire extinguisher or arguing about their importance on the internet?

      Delete
    15. How much time do you spend practicing with your seat belt or cleaning your fire extinguisher . . .

      Confused here. So now you think responsible gun ownership does not require maintaining proficiency, and keeping the firearm in good working order?

      . . . arguing about their importance on the internet?

      How many people are trying to heap yet more restrictions on the ownership and use of seat belts and fire extinguishers--to the point, some times, of advocating total bans?

      Delete
    16. "shall not be infringed magazines."

      Yeah--I kinda like that, too. When I start 3-D printing 30-rounders, maybe I'll mark them "SNBI." A few dozen of those would be a neat contribution to Mike Vanderboegh's smuggling campaign, don't you think?

      Delete