Posted on Jun 14, 2016
Would bum-rushing a shooter like Orlando be the best thing to do??
8.68K
58
42
6
6
0
I don't get it. 49 dead (not counting the shooter), and another 50 wounded. That's 100 people that got shot. If HALF of those people had rushed him, he would have never been able to shoot more than what he had in a single (or double, if he was shooting a gun in both hands) clip. Yes, people would have still died. But not nearly so many as did. Someone would have gotten to him as soon as his clip was empty, if not before. And then they'd pile on. If I thought I was going to die anyway, I'd like to think I'd at least try to get the bastard. Is it time that we start telling people to rush in situations like that? Would you?
Posted in these groups: 
Active Shooter
Active Shooter
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 22
7
7
0
I agree with all who have posted.
In the Army, the "textbook" response to an ambush is to assault into the direction of the ambush.
In the Corrections world, it only takes 5 personnel to take down an aggressive prisoner. The first one has a riot shield (a table would work too) to slam into, stun, and pin down the prisoner, and each of the other 4 personnel each control a limb (hands, feet).
With some clear thinking, this can be accomplished. The problem is that not everyone thinks tactically like this. Unfortunately it is time that everyone START thinking about this. From my experience as a Corrections Officer, as a Soldier, and as a citizen who carries, whenever I go into any new place, I am looking for exits, cover, and routes to both. I ALWAYS look at people's facial expressions, body language, and way they move for any signs that something is about to go sideways. I treat every situation as a potential crisis. It's not a carefree way to go through life, but being oblivious to your surroundings is a great way to find yourself in a bad situation with no options.
In the Army, the "textbook" response to an ambush is to assault into the direction of the ambush.
In the Corrections world, it only takes 5 personnel to take down an aggressive prisoner. The first one has a riot shield (a table would work too) to slam into, stun, and pin down the prisoner, and each of the other 4 personnel each control a limb (hands, feet).
With some clear thinking, this can be accomplished. The problem is that not everyone thinks tactically like this. Unfortunately it is time that everyone START thinking about this. From my experience as a Corrections Officer, as a Soldier, and as a citizen who carries, whenever I go into any new place, I am looking for exits, cover, and routes to both. I ALWAYS look at people's facial expressions, body language, and way they move for any signs that something is about to go sideways. I treat every situation as a potential crisis. It's not a carefree way to go through life, but being oblivious to your surroundings is a great way to find yourself in a bad situation with no options.
(7)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
Yup. Assaulting into an ambush is counterintuitive. Which is why the military has to pound it into you with training.
(2)
(0)
People always say they would do so and most of us honestly believe it, but none of us actaully know how we would react in that exact "fight or flight" situation unless we live through it. Just think, how many people in that night club possibly asked themselves the same question after the last shooting but ended up hiding or fleeing instead? One of the victims was an OEF/OIF veteran and was just like many of us, yet for whatever reason, he was unable to stop it.
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/06/14/army-reserve-captain-killed-in-mass-shooting-orlando-nightclub.html
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/06/14/army-reserve-captain-killed-in-mass-shooting-orlando-nightclub.html
Army Reserve Captain Killed in Mass Shooting at Orlando Nightclub
A U.S. Army Reserve officer was among those killed in the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
Not sure it would be the best thing but its damn sure better than waiting to get shot. SN Greg Wright
(4)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
It requires prior coordination and unwavering commitment to succeed, SN Greg Wright. Individuals rushing sequentially are easily handled, which discourages others from hastening their own demise. The same applies when all but one or two hesitate at the critical moment.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
1LT William Clardy - I disagree, when I see something that need doing I don't need to coordinate or communicate with anyone with the possible exception of someone I am protecting. I develop a plan and act.
(0)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
Overwhelming a gunman by rushing him is a numbers game much akin to the saturation tactics which formed the basis for Soviet Army tactics, LTC (Join to see). Success is based upon saturating the defender's ability to service targets, so you planning and acting alone would most likely result in you being shot as the only target needing to be engaged.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Without seeing the layout of the room, it is hard to decide if that was a better option than hiding or bugging out. There is an old adage about bringing a knife to a gunfight...
It is hard to expect uncommon valor to suddenly surface in a situation like this.
Having said that, if I would have gotten hold of this Muldoon (no jokes about what I am doing in that venue, please), I would have ripped his goddamned throat out and beat him to death with his windpipe.
It is hard to expect uncommon valor to suddenly surface in a situation like this.
Having said that, if I would have gotten hold of this Muldoon (no jokes about what I am doing in that venue, please), I would have ripped his goddamned throat out and beat him to death with his windpipe.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
This would by far be the best thing to do. Unfortunately, it takes a very rare breed of person to run into gunfire. It's hard enough to convince people to stand up to bullies, what makes you think it would be any easier to persuade them to run at a suicidal and sadistic gunman.
(3)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Once you realize that even those in the Army who *should* be trained to accurately place pistol rounds on a stationary target cannot always do that, you know that an untrained civilian waving a pistol has a smaller chance of hitting a moving target.
This should help make your pro vs. con decision on taking action against an active shooter.
This should help make your pro vs. con decision on taking action against an active shooter.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Without seeing for myself what could have been done, it is hard to say. What bothers me is where are all the chairs and tables that could have been tossed? One shooter.......... ?
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
It is so hard to say sat here safely in Fort Living Room.
At go-time, I would hope that my "fight" would overrun my "flight" and try something. Anything. Even if it meant letting others get out first and I stayed to face the cold end. I am sure that most being civilians AND it was dark AND the loud music AND probably drinking/other... AND... AND... slim chances... ((le sigh))
God bless them all.
At go-time, I would hope that my "fight" would overrun my "flight" and try something. Anything. Even if it meant letting others get out first and I stayed to face the cold end. I am sure that most being civilians AND it was dark AND the loud music AND probably drinking/other... AND... AND... slim chances... ((le sigh))
God bless them all.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Look at it as reacting to an near ambush.
1. Those the kill zone immediately return fire.
~ Not gonna happen because you know ... gun laws keep them out of the law abiding and the law abiding don't usually take them some place where they're gonna get hassled and arrested. YAAAAY Gun laws work, see ... fewer guns at the site of the mass murder!
2. Take up covered positions
~ OK, now you have a couple of seconds or minutes before a-hole comes and shoots you.
3. Throw frags and/or smoke.
~ Don't have that but what weapons do you have? He has it in his head that he's the only one who will be attacking so anything that would disrupt his flow might jar him for a second. Sometimes a second is all you need.
4. Assault through the ambush using fire and movement.
~ Bum-rushing a shooter requires the coordinated effort of many and though it is probably the best alternative absent any firearms and other weaponry, it is counter intuitive to all but the most trained and those who still have more flight mindset than the fight mindset.
In the end, I'd like to think I'd go out ala Emiliano Zapata ... It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.
1. Those the kill zone immediately return fire.
~ Not gonna happen because you know ... gun laws keep them out of the law abiding and the law abiding don't usually take them some place where they're gonna get hassled and arrested. YAAAAY Gun laws work, see ... fewer guns at the site of the mass murder!
2. Take up covered positions
~ OK, now you have a couple of seconds or minutes before a-hole comes and shoots you.
3. Throw frags and/or smoke.
~ Don't have that but what weapons do you have? He has it in his head that he's the only one who will be attacking so anything that would disrupt his flow might jar him for a second. Sometimes a second is all you need.
4. Assault through the ambush using fire and movement.
~ Bum-rushing a shooter requires the coordinated effort of many and though it is probably the best alternative absent any firearms and other weaponry, it is counter intuitive to all but the most trained and those who still have more flight mindset than the fight mindset.
In the end, I'd like to think I'd go out ala Emiliano Zapata ... It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
My husband and I were having this discussion today ... we came to the same mathematical calculation. Not to mention there were military veterans there.
We would have died trying.
We would have died trying.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
Rushing him no. The problem with firearms is people are unaccustomed to the sound. So it unnerves them. Would you really want bystanders to start rushing someone or anyone who just so happened to have a firearm?
No, the first thing people should be doing is finding some form of cover. Next, identify the shooter or at least the shooter's location. You wouldn't want to start tackling a law abiding firearm owner who hasn't fired a round yet. Next, if you don't happen to be armed at the time, find a weapon of opportunity. It stands to reason that the average person isn't used to throwing a punch. So they're probably not going to do a lot of damage throwing themselves at the perpetrator. Though if you hit someone with a chair or stab someone with a fork, not only have you done damage, but you've broken his focus.
Yes, a lot of people die running for their lives, but the natural instincts are fight or flight. Flighters are not going to have the same thought process as the fighters.
No, the first thing people should be doing is finding some form of cover. Next, identify the shooter or at least the shooter's location. You wouldn't want to start tackling a law abiding firearm owner who hasn't fired a round yet. Next, if you don't happen to be armed at the time, find a weapon of opportunity. It stands to reason that the average person isn't used to throwing a punch. So they're probably not going to do a lot of damage throwing themselves at the perpetrator. Though if you hit someone with a chair or stab someone with a fork, not only have you done damage, but you've broken his focus.
Yes, a lot of people die running for their lives, but the natural instincts are fight or flight. Flighters are not going to have the same thought process as the fighters.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google