Mass Shootings, Thoughts On Prevention.
University Of Texas Tower, From The Top Deck, Charles Whitman Killed 14 People on August 1, 1966
In April of 1865, Charles J. Colchester, a shady character of a man, met Abraham Lincoln and warned him that his life was in danger. A few days later Abraham Lincoln, the 16th president of the United States was shot in the head. Charles J. Colchester was a friend of John Wilkes Booth.
Lincoln’s Secretaries, John G. Nicolay and John Hay commented on the incident; “But he had himself so sane a mind and a heart so kindly, even to his enemies, that it was hard for him to believe in a political hatred so deadly as to lead to murder.”
“When a man threatens your life, listen & remove him.”
Recognizing The Presence Of A Threat
The concepts of “Patterned Behavior” and “Patterns of Life” have been used by by the military, law enforcement agencies and civilian intelligence agencies as far back as World War I. These concepts help us to identify threats that may be active/present, such as criminals targeting victims in a certain area of the city with robberies and sexual assaults. Terrorist’s planning attacks have often been thwarted due to the study of the terrorist’s own patterned behavior which exposed a pattern of life that indicated a real threat.
Both of these two concepts are close in definition. If you GOOGLE these terms you become overwhelmed with businesses offering to give you a class for a fee. You will see a lot of repeated stereotypical terms, that for the most part have lost their benefit in educating us on recognizing the presence of a threat. I’m not saying that a GOOGLE search is a waste of time, there is beneficial advice on threat assessment available with a GOOGLE search, but as I stated it can be overwhelming sorting through it all.
My definitions of the two concepts of “patterned behavior” and “patterns of life” are:
“Patterned Behavior” - The manner in which we repeatedly react as individuals to stimuli in our environment and the manner in which we react as a group to stimuli in a particular situation.
What is the definition of “stimuli, here are some examples that I feel help best describe stimuli in regard to threat recognition.
A stimulus is any object, event, or factor that influences human behavior. It can be something we see, hear, or feel, affecting our decisions and actions. Noldus
A stimulus is anything that can trigger a physical or behavioral change. MedlinePlus
Patterned behavior is directly linked to the environment that we are in at the moment. The behavior that we exhibit at a park, a church, a courthouse, a social party and our workplace are all individually different.
When a threat introduces itself, there will be a change in the environment that we are currently in. No one knows our current environment better than we do,,,no one. The success of an attack/threat in our own environment is directly related to whether we recognize the stimuli that a threat introduces.
We don’t necessarily need special training to recognize threat stimuli, we just need to pay a little more attention to our immediate environment.
“Patterns of Life” - The longer systematic study of patterned behavior that is often used by government agencies to predict the future behavior of a threat. This study of an individual or group is focused on identifying changes/anomalies that might indicate a future threat or the presence of a imminent threat. A good example is the pattern of life analysis that led to the location and termination of Osama bin Laden. He was never seen at his compound by an eyewitness, but the pattern of life exhibited at his compound differed greatly from the other compounds in his town, this drew the attention of security analysists and led to his downfall.
Almost every mass shooter in my lifetime displayed troubling patterned behavior and a pattern of life prior to the violent act committed. This behavior was often identified/recognized by family members or friends. The problem then becomes, how do we proceed in dealing with the information we have, how do we respond?
“One of the more striking findings in environmental psychology is that human responses to certain physical settings remain remarkably consistent across different situations and over time. People tend to behave in predictable ways within specific types of environments, regardless of individual personality differences.”
Back to the workplace scenario,
Why is workplace violence so prevalent and often successful to the attacker/threat? It’s because management and their employees are preoccupied with other matters, like the daily operation of the business, customer interaction and administrative assignments. When a threat enters his target location, he counts on the staff being preoccupied. Few businesses have the resources to include a secure perimeter, such as a courthouse or airport. Few businesses can pay an armed guard full-time. In businesses that have limited resources (money for security enhancements) we must control the the two most important factors in surviving a violent encounter;
Identifying a potential threat and controlling the distance between you and the threat.
Each business is physically structured different, you must have control over the points of entry and exit. Someone must be conscious of who is entering the building, this can be a shared assignment. The receptionist in your business can often identify a person of concern with a simple greeting. Threats will often ignore a simple greeting and do so without eye contact. Threats want time in location to visualize security measures and determine just how engaged the employees are at the point of entry. Once a person of concern is identified, the receptionist must notify the point of contact employee.
Once a subject of concern is identified, employees must have a plan to respond. This means a point of contact employee assigned to engage the subject of concern and determine if the subject is a threat or potentially a new customer. If the subject is determined to be a threat, then the point of contact employee must be capable of dealing with the threat long enough for the other employees and customers to respond.
Discuss with your employees as a group, what type of behavior from an individual warrants a second look and if a point of contact employee should intervene. Keep in mind that “behavior” in this scenario does not necessarily mean someone exhibiting signs of anger or aggression. Behavior of concern often refers to actions that an individual fails to display.
An armed intruder rapidly entering your business leaves little doubt as to his intent, but not all violent incidents start this way. Often it is a penetration of the business minutes, hours or days prior to the violent act under false pretenses. A complete understanding of the product/service that your business represents and what type of customer would be interested in your product, helps identify a person of concern.
“A common ruse of the sociopath is the penetration of a dwelling under false pretenses.”
Point of Contact Employee
The “Point of Contact Employee” is the first person assigned to engage the person of concern. Your point of contact employee must have the skill and the resources to to engage a threat. If an armed threat has entered your business, no degree of communication between the point of contact employee and the threat will halt the aggression that’s coming. The threat was committed before he entered your business. Your point of contact employee must have the resources on him to put down a threat.
Your employees must be trained in the use of the basic life support equipment that should already be onsite.
Now that we have recognized the threat and determined that a point of contact person has to engage the threat, what other critical factor is crucial in surviving the violent act?
“Distance”
Whether your encounter is a combative sports match, a violent mugging on the street or an active shooter in your business, controlling your distance is critical.
Controlling distance in your business allows you more time in identifying the threat. What I mean is, the distance from the public entrance into your building and the area of concern (main occupied room) must allow employees the time to identify and react to a threat. Re-constructing your building is probably not an option, but implementing some type of control/protocol between the public entrance and the main room will help identify the threat and allow for a response.
Discuss with your employees a procedure that allows for a rapid evacuation, putting distance between them and the threat.
Resources for employees, other than the point of contact person, should be stagged and available. These resources must be under control and accessible within seconds, “911” response is minutes away, at best.
Here are a couple of links to posts that I have in regard to home security and dealing with predators outside your home, I hope something that I have written helps to keep your family and business safe.
Thoughts On Home Security
Survival In Our Daily Routine
Since I first published this post in October of 2019, there have been another “59” fifty-nine mass shootings in America, defined as “3” or more killings in a single event. Britannica
The common denominators that I explained in the 2019 original post , remain the same.
Like many in this country, I have put a lot of thought into the senseless mass shootings that have taken place. My mind drifts back long before Columbine High School in 1999. My limited knowledge on mass shootings starts at the University of Texas.
University of Texas Tower Shooting 1966
On August 1, 1966 Charles Whitman climbed to the top of an observation tower on campus and killed 14 people, wounding another 30 people.
Whitman tried for months to get psychological help prior to the shooting.
McDonalds Shooting in San Ysidro, California, July of 1984
McDonald’s Shooting in San Ysidro, California 1984. Lenny Ignelzi / Associated Press
The first really clear shooting that I remember, was the one at occurred at the McDonalds in San Ysidro, California in July of 1984. James Huberty fatally shot 21 people and wounded another 19. I was a rookie police officer in Miami Beach at the time and for weeks that was all we talked about on the job, “What would we do, How would we respond?”
James Huberty sought unsuccessfully psychological help prior to the shooting.
I’m not going to list all shootings since McDonalds in 1984. Actually this has been successfully done up to the Pulse Nightclub shooting in 2016.
Here is a flowchart for you presented by Maria Esther Hammack of “Behind The Tower.org”. This chart starts with the first one in Parson Hall School in 1891. Behind The Tower.org is a group of students at the University of Texas at Austin who put together a study of the mass shooting carried out by Charles Whitman on August 1st, 1966. This study was conducted in the spring of 2016.
Behind The Tower.org did a great job compiling this study. If more studies on mass shooting were done with this same attention to detail as Behind The Tower.org gave, then maybe we would see a common denominator that we are missing today.
I don’t believe there is one single issue, if addressed, will prevent future shootings. If concerned people get fixated on the weapon itself, then we will all lose this fight.
A brief look at the weapons used in many of the shootings documented in the above chart, presents a slightly different picture as to what it takes to carry out a mass shooting. Yes, several of the latest shootings consisted of so called “Assault” rifles, but “Assault” rifles were not the weapon of choice in all of these shootings.
When I look at this dilemma, I insert my own personal factors.
“I start with an armed individual bent on doing harm on one end of the field and my family member on the other end of the field”.
I ask myself, “How do I keep them apart?”
I could strengthen the perimeter around his school and have an armed threat responder assigned to the school. This started happening last year in Florida schools, a day late and a dollar short in my opinion. College campuses are still open to just about anyone walking in from the street.
Large gatherings, concerts, festivals, etc. could be required to have police on hand, either off-duty or on-duty. No Police, No Permit.
Background checks on all firearm transfers? Many of the past shooters would have passed a background check.
Ban all “Assault” rifles? You might lower the death toll on the next shooting, but is five dead better than 12 dead? Have we really accomplished something here?
Let’s say we implement all of the above, have we done our best to keep that shooter from crossing the field in my scenario and shooting my family member?
No,,,, I don’t feel any safer.
When I think about the threat in my scenario and the lack of success with the above actions implemented, one thought hits me like a slap to the head.
“I will remove him, before he starts down the field toward my family.”
Why are suicide bombers and mass shooters successful in their endeavor?
They are not smart, they are not rich, physically they are inadequate in most of life’s requirements.
Mass shooters are successful because they are committed!
The level of commitment that they reach is beyond most of us. Most of us, no matter how successful we are in our lives, will never reach that level of commitment. Mass shooters accept that life as they know it is over, death usually awaits them, but they still commit to the act, knowing full well that life is over for them. The act becomes, life itself.
Here is where our window of opportunity/action awaits.
The level of commitment needed to take a human life and give your own, does not just spontaneously occur in the minds of mass shooters. The thoughts arise and are cultivated over time. No one wakes up perfectly content and decides to go out after breakfast and kill someone. In almost every case of a mass shooter there were signs prior to the act. Secrets were revealed and often shared with other parties, family members, friends, co-workers, medical professionals, social media contacts.
Remember, a mass shooter is building up to the act, trying to reach that level of commitment that launches the act itself. In building up to the act, the shooter takes a path that could take years or just a matter of days.
Along this path he will need resources and he is looking for justification.
In his quest for resources, he will need to obtain the weapon(s). He may already have access to one, so trying to intercept him during this process may be ineffective.
In his quest for justification, he is most vulnerable.
This could be our best opportunity to act. Remember, the shooter is living the act prior to the actual use of the weapon. He has a new secret that he wants to share.
He may share his secret with a relative, friend or co-worker.
He may share his thoughts over social media.
In his search for justification, he will have to find an enemy.
To simply walk into a scene and kill an innocent is still beyond him, at the moment. He will have to remove the innocent face of a victim and replace it with an enemy.
This can easily done by replacing that innocent face with an ideology that he hates. This way he can group the innocents all together, regardless of their age or race. The act is no longer personal, it's a mission and missions can be easily justified.
Recognizing a change in behavior towards cultures, race or authority, is crucial. This change in behavior can be verbal or physical aggression or a total withdraw of interaction with the people around him.
He may show a sudden disregard for his own well being, he no longer takes care of himself as before. He knows that his time here is short.
He openly identifies his new enemy.
He may have expressed dislike toward this enemy over the years, but now he reveals a desire/plan to take action.
The act is not far off now.
In most of the mass shooting incidents, it did not take a psychiatric professional to recognize that the shooter was on the path to destructive behavior. People(concerned parties) saw indicators that were troubling.
August of 2019,
'Tragedy Averted': Texas Grandma Praised For Stopping Alleged Planned Mass Shooting
The shooter obtained his weapons, made a simple plan, then reached out to share his secret. He reached out to his grandmother. This was his final step to justification, the last stop before total commitment. The grandmother acted, she reached out for help. A tragedy was averted.
In the case of the grandmother in the above Texas case, she reached out directly to the police, probably a “911” call. This method was effective primarily for these reasons.
She was able to place weapons in the subject’s hands at the time of the call to the police.
Meaning, she knew that her grandson owned weapons & heard what she believed to be weapons in the background of the call with her grandson. This tells the police that he has the means to do harm.
The grandson expressed his intent to kill. The grandmother had the grandson’s current location. This makes the threat imminent and the police respond immediately.
The police take the grandson, stopping the act before it happens. The grandson is then referred to psychiatric professionals in a controlled environment
This success story is uncommon.
In most cases, the concerned party does not come forward for the following reasons:.
In the above case, the subject’s parents were afraid of him. They knew he had guns and was unstable, their solution, toss him out of the house. It took grandmother, with an “old school” attitude toward right and wrong, to intervene.
In many cases, the concerned party is afraid of the subject.
Often the concerned party cannot articulate what it is about the subject that alarms them.
Concerned parties will often rationalize the subject's behavior as nothing more than posturing. I believe that this is the number one reason why shooters do not get intercepted before the act. When concerned parties draw this conclusion, it frees them from the fear, indecision and guilt they feel when they contemplate reporting the subject.
Here lies the main question to be answered, in my opinion.
“Who do we notify if we feel there is an issue with someone on the path to a mass shooting?”
School Threats
If the threat is imminent, call “911”. You do not have to give your name. Give as much detail as you can about the subject and what actions led you to make the call.
If the subject is involved in the school system or has made comments that lead you to believe that he intends action at a school, then contact the school system and the police.
Here in Florida, the Office of the Attorney General, Department of Education and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement created an app that allows someone to immediately report suspicious activity at schools anonymously . The report/tip is immediately sent to the school system and police.
FortifyFL
This app was created after the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. Depending on the level of concern, contacting the police directly can also be done anonymously.
If you are not in Florida, take a moment to see if your state has developed a similar app.
Off Campus Threats
Reporting concerns where subjects have yet to identify a target, can be difficult. Difficult in the following ways,
Who do I warn?
Are my concerns rational or am I just a little paranoid due to the recent shooting incidents?
Often the subject uses the internet to build his justification for the act. Most of the time he already has the resources. His display on the internet often showcases his resources. This is the time we report him and the authorities attempt to locate him.
Again, who do we report to? The subject could be in a different state.
I would first “screen capture” what concerns me, make some notes. By the time you make a decision on who to contact, the subject may feel that his identity has been compromised and he deletes his internet account.
If he is using a host such as YouTube, flag him, notify the company.
If you cannot determine where he is; then notify your state law enforcement agency. Their resources are greater than most local agencies. They often have units assigned to nothing but internet investigations.
When reporting to law enforcement agencies, get names of the people you talk to & cases numbers. No one wants to be the person who dropped the ball should the subject turn out to be a mass shooter.
Many states now have what they refer to as “Red Flag Gun Laws”, also referred to as “extreme-risk protection orders”.
The laws vary from state to state, basically a law enforcement officer can petition a judge to temporarily remove weapons from a subject. This temporarily removes the subject’s resources to commit the act and often the subject can be required to get psychological help.
In many states that have Red Flag laws, family, friends and co-workers can petition the court directly. It does not have to be a law enforcement officer.
Follow this link to get a better understanding of Red Flag gun laws.
Going back to my scenario
“If you present yourself as a threat, I’m not wasting time on where you obtained your resources. I’m coming to you before you cross the field to my family.”
Thank You for reading,,,,,,,,,,
