I guess they cannot call it “crazy Tea Party” shooter or “Mentally Troubled teen” or even “Workplace Violence” so that might be why it is getting such a poor coverage.
And with that in mind, allow me to say that the fable “Not If but When” has come officially to pass.
Saw this meme around:
Funny as hell, but also wise: We have several innings to go and they will come back to the plate. We cannot expect they will remain dumb all the time.
Their next target will be researched ahead of time, scouted to look for security and planned to create the biggest amount of killing. If they happen to get a couple of lone wolf idjits with some brain matter, the only thing they have to do is research mass shooters to get ideas.
Gun Free Zones: Bet you butt. The event in Garland was in a school zone so people were unarmed, but they did hire lots of well armed security, not what usually happens. And speaking of schools, we cannot dismiss a condensed Beslam-type scenario. Instead a full production with a cast of hundreds, two or three shooters might be used and be very effective. Even schools with Resource Officers will be fair game since usually they only have one who probably will be one of the first ones to go down. Malls in states that GFZ signs have the weight of law, Churches where it is legally forbidden to carry or the religious leaders have chosen to make the House of God a temptation for evil jackasses to come do harm to the flock.
Texas No More: They will seek locations where the chance of armed civilians is low. So, New York, L.A. Boston and states where the gun laws are not citizen-friendly are once again targets.
State Intelligence LEOs should be crapping on their pants by now. I noticed something interesting: The Garland Shooters were not from Texas but Arizona. They went to a state that probably did not have them in their database and thus expected no specific actions from them. We know that the FBI did have interaction with one of the shooters, but it will be a cold day in the Everglades before the Feds become gratuitous with their intelligence… and I think it might be against the law too. It may be a good idea for State LEO agencies to start a very serious intelligence-sharing process among themselves.
Time to rethink the small 9mm as back up and go back to Full & Medium Size handgun. I had grown fond of my Kahr CW9, but I will revert to my FN with 2 spare mags because boolits. 49 rounds is what we call “a good first step.”
Truck (Vehicle) gun. Distance is better, more distance is more better. Not engaging on what brand/model you should get, but just make sure it is a powerful cartridge and that you have the way to properly lock that thing against thefts.
What else is there? What have I missed you think we need to cover? Chime in!
I’m surprised no terrorists have tried a car bomb here. It may not be as effective as being the only armed person in a gun free zone, but it would certainly make headlines, and that’s what the terrorists want, is headlines. And apparently jobs, or something.
I would also keep an eye out for a kamikaze McVeigh.
On a side note, I’ve read a number news reports that the terrorists used automatic rifles or assault rifles. If that’s true, it seems that mandatory registration and FBI background check thing doesn’t work so good. (http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-news/20150503-police-garland-cop-quickly-killed-2-gunmen-probably-saved-lives.ece)
Bombs are easy to deliver, but you need a bomb maker and those do not grow on trees.
Whenever they think they’ve found a bomb maker, he turns out to be fbi.
I hope that doesn’t change.
Wasn’t true in ’93. They flew in a ringer from Iraq.
Perhaps not, but you can find pieces of the inexperienced ones in trees.
They could of had water guns and the media would still report they had assault rifles.
There was a guy a couple of years ago that did try a car bomb in Times Square. It failed to detonate properly. There have been a few foiled plots that I recall were disrupted when the plotters tried to acquire bomb-making materials and ended trying to buy those materials from FBI informants. Of course, don’t forget the first WTC attack in ’93 and the Boston Marathon 2 years ago. I think you will see more of the ‘lone wolf’ types try their hand at bombing and GFZ’s (as Miguel stated) after these 2 ass clowns got lit up in TX.
“Time to rethink the small 9mm as back up and go back to Full & Medium Size handgun.”
I’ve actually just started that process. Currently carrying a commander size 1911 and have just purchased a Para Ordinance Black Ops with a 14 round capacity.
Pamela Geller is not a member of a hate group. Islam is a hate group. ISIS is a hate group. And the Southern Poverty Law Center is a hate group.
These facts precede Geller’s “Jihad Watch Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest” and I congratulate Pamela Geller for providing the opportunity for ISIS and SPLC idiots to prove these facts to be true.
Those who malign the event promoters for sponsoring the event are trying to justify their refusal to admit the above facts. Denial of facts has never won a war in the history of the planet. ISIS is prosecuting a war against Mankind. Against decency. Against liberty. Against Christianity, Judaism, anything not Islamic and half of that which is. Time to recognize facts.
There is one bright spot in this dark picture: ISIS has taken responsibility for the assault against liberty in Garland, Texas. ISIS is not very bright: It sent two jihadists with AK-47’s and Kevlar vests against a Texan with a handgun. FAIL.
(Re previous comments: My XD compact with two full-size mags equals 37 rounds of .45ACP.)
[…] over at Gun Free Zone has some points we should consider in the aftermath of the failed terrorist attack in […]
I feel well “gunned” with my G19 stuffed with 3 G17 mags for 52 rounds of DPX carried daily. Carry what you shoot the best. Period.
That meme above sucks and shows how stupid the creator of it is.
Nothing like gloating when ISIS holds the tactical advantage of ambush.
Hows that meme going to feel when they pull a Mumbai or Lakeline Mall Nairobi?
Note that Miguel has intuited that they will seek out target-rich zones in soft states. ISIS’ naming purple to deep-blue states for their intended operations would seem to bear this out.
I’d be more wary of DC Sniper-type attacks. Remember how those had the NOVA/DC/Maryland area tied up in knots for weeks?
I lived in the DC area at the time. It was pretty screwed up. I’m surprised it hasn’t happened again.
Everywhere you go, Look for Escape Routes. Have a plan BEFORE it hits the fan. One of the best things you can do is get you, yours, and other innocents OUT! Running away while summoning help is a good thing.
Get Out.
Get Help.
Disagree on the caliber. Not dissing on .40 or .45, but I have a XD in 9mm that I shoot well, and the same equipment load-out as doncline above (full gun, 2 extra mags) in mine equals 49 rounds instead of 37.
Carry the biggest caliber you have and that you shoot well. If that’s a .380, it beats a sharp word and a stick.
Don’t forget trauma kits & training to use them. At the Boston Marathon Bombing people were improvising tourniquets. A couple CAT or SWAT-T with Quick-Clot and Israeli bandages would be nice to have on hand, maybe a chest seal too.
All good things to have.
I would DEFINITELY NOT use an AK as a truck gun. If there’s an incident, the call will go out as “males with rifles.” The cops roll up, and the first thing they see is a male with a rifle. Not only a rifle, but an “assault rifle” like the terrorists use. What do you think will happen next?
If you’re going to carry a rifle, I would recommend a bolt or lever rifle. That way you will look less like an assailant and more like a guy who happened to be passing by when he heard shots.
Truck gun is kinda hard to fit in a motorcycle… Also I’m iffy on the concept. Leaving and reengaging with a rifle seems like a very good way to get mistaken as a perpetrator.
You have to concentrate in the immediate threat. Balance between “Hey, those f*ckers are shooting now” versus “Cops may shoot me when they show up in 5 minutes.”
I don’t disagree, there is that concern. If you are right next to your car and the guy is shooting 100ft from you you are in the middle of it. But if you remove yourself from the initial confrontation like running from the mall, church, etc to the parking lot to retrieve a firearm you are that much closer to being outside of the engagement and having to reengage. I don’t know about you, but if I had to leave the typical mall in my area and derp my way safely back inside to shoot at bad guys, I think it would take me 10 or more minutes; smaller businesses less time obviously.
That’s where it becomes a tactical or strategic decision. And that’s my point, the truck gun may save your life or help you save the life of someone else, but leaving a situation to retrieve it and going back in is not without significant risk not just from the bad guys but the good guys. It’s cautionary words to prevent believing the truck gun is the end all be all or storming back in locked and loaded is a good idea all the time. And to echo Exurbankevin’s words below, that might not even be the best way to put yourself to use to begin with.
Prepare your response to an active shooter as if if it was a natural disaster.
Yes, you MAY be THE GUY to take down the bad guy, but think about it: Out of all those cops in full battle-rattle, only one of them put lead down range, the rest were triage and site security. Be prepared to not be THE GUY, but rather, save the lives of others.
What would have saved more lives in Boston, a Glock, or Quikclot? Have a blowout kit within reach (Todd Green had an article on a very cool one the size of a deck of cards) and be prepared to use it.
What good does it do you to take down the bad guy, only to have your loved one lead out in front of you?
Prepare your response to an active shooter as if if it was a natural disaster.
Them strong wise words there. And my fault for assuming everybody is packing a kit as I do.
That will be addressed in a future post.
Hmm, might be high time for states to finally cooperate. States have inter-agency connections and the Fusion Centers for crime, but they tend to be for local/regional/big city centered and mainly for FBI, DHS, and Local/State LE to coordinate.
This is as much as I can really say about it before I direct questions to my agency’s media office.
My fear is that these fusion centers are more political and politically correct. You and I are more likely to show up in their databases than the
Somali Jihadi wanna-be who is listening to Al-Shaahab and ISIL. And more likely to be harassed.
The Charlie Hedbo attackers were known to the French Police. The FBI interviewed and cleared Flashbang and Speed Bump (Boston bombers), even though the Russians were warning us they were fanatics. The Garland TX attacker had been convicted and was put on probation. Nidal Hassan had “Soldier of Allah” on his @#%$ business cards!!!
How effective were the experts?
Me appearing on the Fusion center would also mean half the workforce of the government agency I’m a part of would be flagged as well. I’m still on the right side of moderate, I have coworkers who are more ‘flag worthy’ than I am on the right. XD
There’s also that thing about information. We can collect as much as we can give em to people that need it, but sometimes the people that need it ignore it. I’ve seen how much work the Fusion centers do. It’s what the people who is the recipient of that information does is what invalidates their work.
The fusion centers who said having a Gadsden flag/sticker meant you were to be suspected, etc.?
I don’t think so
[…] over at Gun Free Zone has a good write up on the subject. I highly suggest reading it and considering the […]
[…] Back on the Garland Shooting post, Exurbankevin made the point that we also needed to be the ones saving lives: […]