TexasCHLforum.com

simianangel wrote:I'm not blaming the cavalry but I think it's foolish to count on them to save you.

True enough.

simianangel wrote:

Excaliber wrote:The finding that, in cases where the time frames are known, most incidents are over in 5 minutes or less should have everyone thinking. Waiting for the cavalry to come to the rescue is not a confidence inspiring strategy.

Even when the incidents last longer, the cavalry doesn't inspire confidence. Columbine, Fort Hood, Beslan, Westgate, etc.

I think, to be fair, that each of those tragic events were at those times pretty unique and the law enforcement agencies were not prepared for those events. Since then, many departments have begun training and planning for those type of attacks. Many departments here have implemented policies where in the event of an active shooter, rather than wait outside for reinforcements, a single officer can go in to engage the shooter.

I'm still confused by the issue of calling something a "mass shooting" only if 3+ people are killed. If someone shoots 3, 5, 10, or 20+ people, but none of them die it doesn't count as a "mass shooting?" It seems to me that they've all got the difference between a mass shooting and a mass killing/murder/homicide switched up.