One account of the Orlando shooting

davidmcbeth · Jun 14, 2016

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/14/us/reconstruct-orlando-pulse-shootings.html

Looks like the 3 hr time period (noted in prior threads) for police response was accurate, one off duty cop did try (clearly not able to hit the target)~ IMO...not something I would consider an adequate response.

I'm sure that there will be many articles about this shooting....its a news article, so take it for what it is.

I would guess that the cops who initially showed up had their patrol rifles ... and could not hit the broadside of a barn with them ~ as I have seen with PDs in my area.

lockman · Jun 14, 2016

I don't know about the broadside of a barn, but they certainly couldn't hit the broadside of a brain.

MarkD51 · Jun 14, 2016

Surely didn't sound like any "Dirty Harry" scenario, where somebody had the fortitude (cojones) to walk in and do what was needed to be done.

Almost sounds like a "Dunkin Donuts" pit stop was in order first.

Might sound rude, and I can understand caution, but 3 hours!? Geesh.

markand · Jun 15, 2016

Long delays to engage an active shooter are, sadly, not uncommon. I recall that the Columbine SWAT team took hours to assess that particular situation, establish a command post and perimeter and develop an entry and engagement plan before they went into the school. Evaluation of that event led to some changes in doctrine regarding active shooters, including engaging the active shooter with whatever response was available as soon as possible and NOT waiting for backup or SWAT. The off duty officer at the scene apparently tried to do just that and immediately engage, but was unsuccessful. The active shooter was apparently a well trained security guard who guarded Florida courts and worked for a major TSA security contractor!!! I would speculate that he was probably well versed on police response to an active shooter situation and probably had undergone that training himself. The off duty officer and the first two responding officers tried to engage the bad guy a short time later, but succeeded only in driving the shooter into a bathroom filled with innocents, setting up a hostage situation that the SWAT team resolved 3 hours later.

I'm sure there will be lots of analysis and what-if questioning as the investigation unfolds. Based on what I think I know right now, I can't fault the actions of those first 3 officers. They tried to engage right away, but were up against an adversary who was well armed and better trained than the typical suicide terrorist.

deepdiver · Jun 15, 2016

markand said:
Long delays to engage an active shooter are, sadly, not uncommon. I recall that the Columbine SWAT team took hours to assess that particular situation, establish a command post and perimeter and develop an entry and engagement plan before they went into the school. Evaluation of that event led to some changes in doctrine regarding active shooters, including engaging the active shooter with whatever response was available as soon as possible and NOT waiting for backup or SWAT. The off duty officer at the scene apparently tried to do just that and immediately engage, but was unsuccessful. The active shooter was apparently a well trained security guard who guarded Florida courts and worked for a major TSA security contractor!!! I would speculate that he was probably well versed on police response to an active shooter situation and probably had undergone that training himself. The off duty officer and the first two responding officers tried to engage the bad guy a short time later, but succeeded only in driving the shooter into a bathroom filled with innocents, setting up a hostage situation that the SWAT team resolved 3 hours later.

I'm sure there will be lots of analysis and what-if questioning as the investigation unfolds. Based on what I think I know right now, I can't fault the actions of those first 3 officers. They tried to engage right away, but were up against an adversary who was well armed and better trained than the typical suicide terrorist.

That's the first possible explanation I have seen that actually makes sense. +1

Grapeshot · Jun 15, 2016

markand said:
Long delays to engage an active shooter are, sadly, not uncommon. I recall that the Columbine SWAT team took hours to assess that particular situation, establish a command post and perimeter and develop an entry and engagement plan before they went into the school. Evaluation of that event led to some changes in doctrine regarding active shooters, including engaging the active shooter with whatever response was available as soon as possible and NOT waiting for backup or SWAT. The off duty officer at the scene apparently tried to do just that and immediately engage, but was unsuccessful. The active shooter was apparently a well trained security guard who guarded Florida courts and worked for a major TSA security contractor!!! I would speculate that he was probably well versed on police response to an active shooter situation and probably had undergone that training himself. The off duty officer and the first two responding officers tried to engage the bad guy a short time later, but succeeded only in driving the shooter into a bathroom filled with innocents, setting up a hostage situation that the SWAT team resolved 3 hours later.

I'm sure there will be lots of analysis and what-if questioning as the investigation unfolds. Based on what I think I know right now, I can't fault the actions of those first 3 officers. They tried to engage right away, but were up against an adversary who was well armed and better trained than the typical suicide terrorist.

deepdiver said:
That's the first possible explanation I have seen that actually makes sense. +1

Excellant analysis. We shall see how this plays out.

davidmcbeth · Jun 15, 2016

markand said:
<snip>

I'm sure there will be lots of analysis and what-if questioning as the investigation unfolds. Based on what I think I know right now, I can't fault the actions of those first 3 officers. They tried to engage right away, but were up against an adversary who was well armed and better trained than the typical suicide terrorist.

Question I would have would be: When did he shoot people over time? If, for example, he only shot one person in the first hour, then the police could have (sure, at risk) minimized the civilians (see cops don't think that they are civilians ~ yet they do not act like military personnel either) being killed.

3 hrs? What did they have a kick-off lunch to start their day? Anyone who thinks 3 hrs is OK is simply apologizing.

We'll never get the actual facts I would assume. Just like Sandy Hook.

since9 · Jun 15, 2016

MarkD51 said:
Might sound rude, and I can understand caution, but 3 hours!? Geesh.

Agreed. The burning question in my mind is, "How many more people died during those three hours?"

I also cannot help but wonder if the shooter planned the "hostage" situation as an intentional delaying tactic?

There are times for such delays, such as a bank robbery with clear hostages and no shots fired. But when patrons are running out saying "active shooter," there needs to be an immediate response to render the shooter inactive.

Yes, it's dangerous. That's why they're paid the big bucks.[SUP]1[/SUP]

[SUP]1[/SUP]Tongue in cheek. It's what we used to say before going on dangerous missions.

deepdiver · Jun 15, 2016

From what I can glean from reports, as many as 30 of the victims were executed when cornered in the bathroom with the terrorist. He apparently was walking up and executing wounded who were still alive in the bathroom, perhaps in other areas as well. It's all still pretty convoluted as to how it all went down inside. Just horrifying and horrible. The slaughter of innocents infuriates me.

HPmatt · Jun 16, 2016

There was the one girl recording a video of herself - when you heard the shooting first begin over the music - it sounded like he was firing rapidly - understand she was killed

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MarkD51 · Jun 17, 2016

since9 said:
Agreed. The burning question in my mind is, "How many more people died during those three hours?"

I also cannot help but wonder if the shooter planned the "hostage" situation as an intentional delaying tactic?

There are times for such delays, such as a bank robbery with clear hostages and no shots fired. But when patrons are running out saying "active shooter," there needs to be an immediate response to render the shooter inactive.

Yes, it's dangerous. That's why they're paid the big bucks.[SUP]1[/SUP]

[SUP]1[/SUP]Tongue in cheek. It's what we used to say before going on dangerous missions.

Me I'm 61 years old, pretty much ready for the Glue Factory, but you know what? If I was given the permission, and the armament to walk in that nightclub's door, I wouldn't give a rat's patoot if they were paying me $7.50/hr, I'd go for ******* broke, and it would be me, or him.

Some might say, yeah, you're just nothing more than a "keyboard commando", but I truly don't think so. Hand me my colt 45, and a few clips, a bulletproof vest, I'm walking in, screw it.

As the saying goes, when the going gets tough, the tough get going.

That retard in the white house has militarized just about every police dept in the nation with free gibs, MRAPS, etc, but I surely don't see many police departments getting better at the jobs they do.

Didn't that one time in NY, the police shoot more innocents than the perps did?

solus · Jun 17, 2016

MarkD51 said:
Me I'm 61 years old, pretty much ready for the Glue Factory, but you know what? If I was given the permission, and the armament to walk in that nightclub's door, I wouldn't give a rat's patoot if they were paying me $7.50/hr, I'd go for ******* broke, and it would be me, or him.

Some might say, yeah, you're just nothing more than a "keyboard commando", but I truly don't think so. Hand me my colt 45, and a few clips, a bulletproof vest, I'm walking in, screw it.

As the saying goes, when the going gets tough, the tough get going.

That retard in the white house has militarized just about every police dept in the nation with free gibs, MRAPS, etc, but I surely don't see many police departments getting better at the jobs they do.

Didn't that one time in NY, the police shoot more innocents than the perps did?

agree, a hundred percent...

our military does just that on a daily basis...step out and take care of business.

also do not know why the police didn't use loudspeakers to tell those inside to attack the shooter......300 against one?

finally where is this mysterious off duty LE that 'shot' at the shooter in the initial outbursts? hummmm?

ipse

MarkD51 · Jun 17, 2016

solus said:
agree, a hundred percent...

our military does just that on a daily basis...step out and take care of business.

also do not know why the police didn't use loudspeakers to tell those inside to attack the shooter......300 against one?

finally where is this mysterious off duty LE that 'shot' at the shooter in the initial outbursts? hummmm?

ipse

The greatest moves that any person can employ against an adversary, is the "feint". Bruce Lee was a master at such, as all good martial artists are. Especially when facing a more proficient-stronger opponent.

Just like Clint Eastwood did in the one movie, he dressed up like an Airline Pilot, and boarded the Plane that was overtaken by hijackers.

I maybe am talking too much, but it hurts us all, that America faces these atrocities, and seems nothing but red tape and PC Correctness ties our hands.

.

press1280 · Jun 18, 2016

davidmcbeth said:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/14/us/reconstruct-orlando-pulse-shootings.html

Looks like the 3 hr time period (noted in prior threads) for police response was accurate, one off duty cop did try (clearly not able to hit the target)~ IMO...not something I would consider an adequate response.

I'm sure that there will be many articles about this shooting....its a news article, so take it for what it is.

I would guess that the cops who initially showed up had their patrol rifles ... and could not hit the broadside of a barn with them ~ as I have seen with PDs in my area.

So I guess the saying should be "When seconds count, the police are only hours away"

MAC702 · Jun 18, 2016

MarkD51 said:
...Might sound rude, and I can understand caution, but 3 hours!? Geesh.

Cops aren't pawns. They aren't expendable. It's not all that hard to hold a chokepoint with a rifle when everyone else inside has been disarmed for your convenience. They have no duty to endanger themselves to rescue people. The blame rests with the gun-free zones and the culture of ignorance that we are responsible for our own safety.

That said, a curse on all cops who support victim-disarmament zones.

solus · Jun 18, 2016

btw, what happened to said off duty inside the venue after he shot at, and missed said bad guy....havent heard one iota about them whatsoever?

ipse

77zach · Jun 18, 2016

If they knew he was killing people and they waited 3 hours, F 'em and their MRAPS and tacticool gear. The whole thing just blows my mind. I like how the "conservative" media absolves the legislature of all wrong doing. The house and senate republicans are at fault for maintaining these "gun free zones" within the state. You can't fault "full auto liars" (aka democrats). All democrats can do is auto-lie in service of their stupid narrative. The republicans lie and tell the sheeple they value their freedom, then stab them in the back. Always.

I'm pretty confident there was at least one ho mo at that club who would have been armed if it weren't a state mandated "gun free zone". It may not have had a difference, but that's not the point.

hammer6 · Jun 19, 2016

77zach said:
If they knew he was killing people and they waited 3 hours, F 'em and their MRAPS and tacticool gear. The whole thing just blows my mind. I like how the "conservative" media absolves the legislature of all wrong doing. The house and senate republicans are at fault for maintaining these "gun free zones" within the state. You can't fault "full auto liars" (aka democrats). All democrats can do is auto-lie in service of their stupid narrative. The republicans lie and tell the sheeple they value their freedom, then stab them in the back. Always.

I'm pretty confident there was at least one ho mo at that club who would have been armed if it weren't a state mandated "gun free zone". It may not have had a difference, but that's not the point.

so then where's the lawsuit?

77zach · Jun 19, 2016

hammer6 said:
so then where's the lawsuit?

Who has the money and time to waste on creating bad precedent. There won't be a purge, but if there was, I'd start with the judiciary.

solus · Jun 19, 2016

Economics 101

1. who pays for the nice LEs,feds, workload on coroners, medical providers, ad nauseam?
2. how much money are the insurance carriers on the hook for death policies, liability claims, ad nauseam?
3. how much of the money nationally donated and distributed will actually be accounted for ?

4. how much money is going to be spent on 'investigating' ?

quote: Florida Assistant State Attorney Kenneth Lewis penned a Facebook post blasting the entire city, which he called a "national embarrassment" and a "melting pot of third-world miscreants and ghetto thugs," WFTV reports. "Downtown Orlando has no bottom," Lewis wrote in the post. "The entire city should be leveled. It is void of any redeeming quality...It is void of culture." And it went on like that. http://www.newser.com/story/226869/florida-assistant-state-attorney-bashes-orlando-on-facebook.html

ipse

One account of the Orlando shooting

Banned

State Researcher

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Legendary Warrior

Banned

Campaign Veteran

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member