Special considerations when dealing with an elevated shooter...

Status
Not open for further replies.
lemaymiami

lemaymiami

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2010
Messages
3,528
Location
south Florida
I wasn't shocked this morning at the news out of Los Vegas... saddened - but not shocked. When I turned 18 (all the back in 1966...) the term "active shooter" wasn't in use - but that would change, wish it weren't so...

During a career in law enforcement I was forced to learn everything I could about all of the possible shooting situations I (or later my officers...) might encounter and over the years came to the conclusion that tactics and strategy were far more important than whatever weaponry you might have at hand (or want to have...) if you wanted a good chance at survival. That's why I'm posting this since most aren't aware of some special considerations involving an elevated shooter (whether it's one carefully aimed shot at a time by a trained sniper - or someone with automatic weapons covering a killing ground with a large crowd under the gun...). In short our first instincts betray us if we go to cover since an elevated shooter can still see over whatever vehicle or wall you attempt to hide behind.... The lesson was thoroughly taught by the book Street Survival (still my bible although probably long out of print - and certainly dated...).

They spent some effort showing just how vulnerable you are to an elevated shooter with clear photos of the actual scene of the "Texas tower shooter" as it happened years ago showing the actual disposition of officers that later died exactly where they were, while hiding behind vehicles (from news photos taken as the incident occurred showing some of the responders that died that day)... To show it, they had photos from the actual shooting position on top of that building that the shooter used after the fact.... Each photo showed that although behind good cover - the victim's head and shoulders were clearly visible to the shooter...

In short as soon as you realize it's an elevated shooter (and if you're under the gun you simply may not be able to determine where the shots are coming from) your first actions need to be going to cover that's above you - not in front of you... all in the ongoing chaos of an "active shooter" situation. I have nothing but praise for all of the folks that risked their lives to save others (both the trained responders and ordinary citizens putting it all on the line under fire) but we need to also consider how best to train for such incidents ( that incident in Dallas comes to mind) so that our side can deal with this sort of action, and minimize the damage done.

I'm long out of police work but know that every police agency (and quite a few civilian trainers) will look at this incident and make their plans and strategies to deal with this new (actually old) threat - the elevated shooter - who has all the advantages at first....
 
I don't know where you find overhead cover in a concert. I doubt that they even realized where the shots were coming from.

If you're on the street, under a parked vehicle would be the place to go. But in an outdoor event like this concert I think the only defense is to try to get out of the area.
 
Difficult to train for. The consequences of missing are greater for other hotel guests or in the case of towers and other tall structures, misses over the top.

I was surprised to hear on the tube last night that the LV police hadn't trained for this situation (don't know if true). For some hotels, they could occupy adjacent hotel rooms to address the threat. But the "Strip" is pretty thick now with properties with varying architectures. There are places where they may be forced to take high elevation shots.

I don't know if snipers develop experience shooting at near vertical angles. Do they? Elevation adjustments differ a bit when shooting at high angles relative to the horizon. I've seen a few sheer cliffs in my travels that would work as a simulated high-rise. But they are not common, certainly not around Las Vegas.

Sadly, the generic terrorist in the U.S. will add this to their repertoire.
 
In the absolute chaos of the situation, with gunfire reverberating off other buildings, I don't think anyone would have thought that the shooter was in an elevated position. I can't think of any recent shootings or terror attacks that have occured in that way.
 
lemaymiami..

The Whitman incident you refer to occurred the year you turned 18, and the year I was born. Any study of it is definitely eye-opening material regarding the very scenario you discuss. Even ground-based return fire was ineffective, though it had an impact on Whitman's ability to continue acquiring targets while ducking to avoid incoming rounds.

This latest attack wakes us up again.

It will be interesting when we learn how many casualties are direct results of hits by bullets, as opposed to injuries sustained during flight from the scene. With a crowd estimated to be 22K in size, the odds are low of being hit, but extremely high of still being seriously injured otherwise.

Parked cars may indeed provide some effective cover or, at least, concealment (as long as no one jumps in it and drives off!) What's next for the market, Kevlar umbrellas equipped with folding shock plates?

It's an eye-opening discussion, for certain.
 
MedWheeler wrote:
With a crowd estimated to be 22K in size, the odds are low of being hit, but extremely high of still being seriously injured otherwise.
Click to expand...

With a crowd of 22,000, the odds of any one individual being hit were in the individual's favor, but given the size of the enclosure, the odds of the shooter hitting "something" were a virtual certainty.
 
lemaymiami wrote:
...this new (actually old) threat - the elevated shooter - who has all the advantages at first....
Click to expand...

I agree that the elevated shooter has an initial advantage because the targets are not used to thinking in terms of looking above or below themselves. The elevated shooter loses the advantage because their avenue(s) of escape are limited. In a multi-story building, the shooter can look to only the elevators and stairwells unless he intends to try and rappel from his perch and since rappelling from a tower or tall building is so unusual, he then becomes an obvious target.
 
hdwhit said:
The elevated shooter loses the advantage because their avenue(s) of escape are limited. In a multi-story building, the shooter can look to only the elevators and stairwells unless he intends to try and rappel from his perch and since rappelling from a tower or tall building is so unusual, he then becomes an obvious target.
Click to expand...

Yes an elevated position such as a tower, tall building or a tree is a deathtrap for the shooter. But if the shooter is prepared to die in place to accomplish the mission then he can be hard to take out. I seem to remember a similar incident in New Orleans back in the 70s or early 80s. I believe the police put marksmen in a Marine or Coast Guard helicopter to try to take out the gunman.
 
Another advantage this shooter had was the ground beneath the crowd. I’m thinking that from the shooter’s elevation, even a miss could result in a ricochet hit since the ground was concrete. Any rounds hitting the concrete would likely have a second chance to strike someone.
 
Another thing to consider is the reaction of the crowd. My first instinct would be to find cover or at least be on the move quickly to provide a moving target. All these cries of "get down" in this video gives me the chills. 20,000 non moving targets just huddled down. Elevated position or not, just sitting there and waiting to be shot isn't the best tactic.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2017/1...rig-tc.cnn/video/playlists/atv-breaking-news/
 
Blackstone said:
In the absolute chaos of the situation, with gunfire reverberating off other buildings, I don't think anyone would have thought that the shooter was in an elevated position. I can't think of any recent shootings or terror attacks that have occured in that way.
Click to expand...
Didn't the guy who shot the Dallas police officers fire from an elevated position?
 
I was moved to begin this thread after seeing video/pics of officers hiding behind vehicles in ways that absolutely left them terribly vulnerable (you think you're concealed and behind something protective - but you're actually badly exposed to an overhead shooter...).

For those that pointed out how difficult it would be to determine where the shooter actually was from the sound of gunshots.... they're absolutely right, but once the knowledge is gained then getting under something that would stop a rifle round (if you're not able to exit the ambush area -and an overhead ambush is exactly what this was...) would be a life saver for any responder -or any ordinary citizen caught in the kill zone. Failing that, finding cover under something not bullet-proof would still provide some protection since the shooter(s) not being able to see you reduces your target profile considerably - things like stages, tents, concession stands, ticket booths all would be better than simply going prone in the beaten zone of an ambush zone... By the way - I'm betting this whole topic is something the Secret Service is very well educated and trained for (and probably right up there in their nightmares since a well designed high angle ambush is a tough one to beat...).

Lastly, I'd like to claim I have the answers ( I don't in any sense of the words) but most of this topic is much more about questions and things that trainers will want to consider (whether for armed responders or just ordinary citizens wanting to learn how to protect themselves and their families....).

One last thought... from what we've learned from news media this first day after the event - the signs point to someone with some skills and a deliberate intent to kill a bunch of folks he didn't know... Towards the end of my career on the street I became convinced that our modern world has brought us some significant downsides - among them are what I term the "aggressive suicide" - an individual intent on dying - and planning to take as many folks with him as possible (you'll note that so far we've never seen a female involved unless it's a true politically or religiously motivated action. The aggressive suicide is something we're not dealing very well with since we never seem to identify them before they act... That will be a topic I suspect we'll hear more about in coming years and things we can do to prevent this sort of incident (at least I hope so...).
 
Rather than a lot of guessing and little information, this topic may be best left for a couple days until we know more.

As to the guessing and little information, several have said they didnt think the people would know where the shots were coming from or that they were from above. Watching videos of people there, several mentioned they thought he was at the building he was in, one or more said they first thought he was on the roof. Video of the concert, then beginning of the shooting, the cameras started panning the building and the top of it. So, lots of bad guesses and little solid info. Cant say I'm too surprised, unfortunately. The uninformed guessing isnt productive.
 
Special considerations? Darn near none. In an open area, being shot at from an elevated position you are pretty much SOL. I saw pictures of victims hiding behind Jersey concrete barriers but that has nowhere near enough cover for 22,000 people. The term "shooting fish in a barrel" aptly comes to mind. Even if all 22,000 people in attendance were armed, it probably would not have made much difference unless they all decided to shoot that side of the hotel.

lemaymiami said:
I was moved to begin this thread after seeing video/pics of officers hiding behind vehicles in ways that absolutely left them terribly vulnerable (you think you're concealed and behind something protective - but you're actually badly exposed to an overhead shooter...).
Click to expand...

I saw a picture of a female officer hiding behind a squad car holding a shotgun over the hood facing the hotel. My first thought was someone didn't pay attention at the academy.
 
One thing to note if you've never been under fire, is you can actually hear the rounds coming in separate for the sound of the gunshot itself in videos from this incident. This is a clue that the fire is a ways off, and in this type of situation, there is very little place other than an elevated position to shoot from that has any really distance to the area taking rounds. As others have noted, getting out of the area as fast as possible or barring that, under something is your best option. A hidden target is probably not a target in this type of situation.

In this situation the angles would have actually been fairly low (about 20 degrees with some back of the napkin math), rather then say the UT tower incident were the anglers were much larger. A low angle allow for more areas to be cover than higher engagement angles. Regardless it's a bad situation to be in. As far as the geometry goes, closing the angle with the threat actually makes for a much for difficult targeting problem, as the engagement angle rapidly increases. This will change their PoA/PoI relationship quickly, and also get into the safe space into which they cannot engage into (without hanging out the window at least). 300 meters is a fair piece of ground to cover, but most adults could easily do that in under a minute at a run. Now you'd have to know which way to run, but assuming that could be figured out quickly, it would be a very effective method of getting out of the possible line of fire.

-Jenrick
 
911 recording. Within the first couple minutes people are saying they think the shooter is in the Mandalay Bay Hotel, first one said he thought about halfway up. Folks. lets think more before jumping into a discussion with no clue whats going on. Early news reports are often wrong on may accounts, but early info I saw today, both news reports with interviews of survivors and video posted by news and individuals was pretty clear on where the shots were coming from very soon after they started. Go search youtube, theres a lot there.

This is the 911 recording



A post hijacked in its entirety from elsewhere, to the point about where to get information.

" LVMPD briefs are really excellent and all you need for information. They seem to be the source for all the news articles anyway.

Here is their main youtube account where they post these:

https://www.youtube.com/user/LasVegasPolice

Here is where they release print press releases:

http://www.lvmpd.com/en-us/Pages/Press-Releases.aspx
 
"Death comes from above."
I can't remember from where the quote but I'm fairly certain from either a Vietnam era movie or WWII era movie dealing with jungle warfare. I always remembered it in both the military and as a cop and reminded my boys of the same when they enlisted.
What happened today was staggering on many accounts; the victims, even if they were trained, and most weren't, having watched a fair number of amateur footage on YouTube, didn't even know they were being fired upon. As the firing continued and they finally heard it over the speakers, many thought it was firecrackers or fireworks. I don't blame them a bit, even those that could identify shots being fired were deafened by the music at first. This is truly a first in magnitude and bewildering on so many levels. I can't even begin to think of any type of "tactical" solution for myself if I were to place myself at the concert.
Whitman began targeting people blocks away that had no clue, that and the advantage of height is all that is similar.
I doubt I wouldn't have even responded except to say that. This is a whole different scenario. Total nightmare where at the moment we know very little other than someone shot a whole bunch of people. Listening to some of these youtube videos, I could discern at least two different calibers and by admission of the Clark County Sheriff, heavy weapons were used ("...from .308's to .223's"). They are now saying he didn't alter the weapons but used a bump-stock. IDK, but from the sound, and taking into account that my 55 year old shoulder couldn't put up with that type of punishment (the shooter was 64) it sounded like an altered weapon, but I could be wrong. I think, we'll never really know precisely what happened. If this thread is about how to deal with an active shooter from a height advantage, then I think the OP had said it all and very professionally. I don't think this is the time for us here to analyze this right now.
 
I'm not LE. I'm retired military.

A quick response time, with firepower available, is what's needed in order to neutralize a shooter(s) IOT stop the threat to people in the open.

One solution would be a team of helicopters whose pilots are equipped with NVS and NVG sight systems. Once the pilots ID the shooter's location up high, they put a missile or some 30mm thru the window. BUT it's not a combat zone, so that's out as an option.

Instead, you maintain a helicopter team on alert status on the ground during the event. Or better yet, keep one in the air during the event performing recon patrols. Set up the pilot's to fly using NVS/NVG sights. Put a team of shooter's in the back also with NV capability. Now you have an executable option to neutralize the threat. Regardless of what kind of shooting situation you face, you are also covering first responders on the ground with fire and information.

Another variation can expedite a blue team directly to the rooftop with the second aircraft. Just some options using aerial platforms. I know, it's expensive. But it works.
 
There are some possible security solutions that, in retrospect, might have greatly reduced the carnage. Problem is that security costs money and businesses are very reluctant to spend it. And there are how many concerts going on at any given time in America? For an outdoor concert at the base of a few buildings it would seem prudent to have a few police snipers positioned at various locations in the surrounding buildings. Obviously a sniper higher up in the same tower wouldn't have a shot but the ones opposite would. But that would cost money.

This is among the worst situations I can envision for a citizen, armed or not. Few people aside from maybe Jerry Miculek would be able to effectively return fire with a sidearm against an opponent four hundred yards away. Body armor? Soft armor probably wouldn't have helped at all. Carrying a blowout kit would at least give you a better chance of survival if you got hit.

I really don't like outdoor concerts. The sound is usually bad and you're at the mercy of the weather. And of course security is a problem. Last outdoor concert I attended was three or so years back- I was armed (legally) although I'm sure the promoters would have tossed me out if they'd seen my sidearm. It didn't take long to find out that the gun was probably not going to be very useful! It was awkward to avoid pressing the weapon into people while being jostled in a crowd and it would have been nearly impossible to fire without jeopardizing bystanders. I tend to avoid concerts for the most part because I'm not comfortable with the crowds (and I don't like to stand there all night).
 
Jeff White said:
Yes an elevated position such as a tower, tall building or a tree is a deathtrap for the shooter. But if the shooter is prepared to die in place to accomplish the mission then he can be hard to take out.
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly. The "elevated position" is suicidal for the shooter, since it usually leaves him no avenue for escape.

I was there, on campus, during the Whitman massacre in August 1966 at the University of Texas. I realized immediately that it was gunfire from above, and got the hell out of there as fast as I could. An autopsy later showed that Whitman was suffering from a brain tumor. He apparently had decided on a "suicide by cop" while taking as many other people as possible with him.

The parallels with the Las Vegas situation are striking. Clearly, the shooter had no plans to escape. Ergo, he must have been suicidal. I'm willing to bet that it comes out later that he had been diagnosed with a terminal illness, had serious financial difficulties, or had some other reason to want to end his life. The shooting was a demented "statement" that he wanted to make on the way out.

Unfortunately, there is absolutely nothing that society can do to prevent or defend against such a situation. All that the police can do is satisfy the shooter's suicidal impulses, but by that time the damage has already been done. All that individuals can do is try to avoid large crowds. This renewed talk of gun control is fatuous. That horse is already out of the barn. A new "assault weapons ban" is meaningless, because there are too many such weapons already out there. The shooter probably violated the NFA. Even the NFA, the most draconian federal gun law, has proven to be unenforceable. And further background checks? This shooter would have passed any conceivable background check. The gun control crowd has its agenda, and it's predictably being pushed in the wake of this tragedy even though it has nothing to do with the actual facts of the tragedy.
 
If you read the historical reports about Omaha Beach, Pickett's Charge, Cowpens, etc., despite their military context, gives you some idea about the difficulty when fighting someone who is elevated over their target. Commanding heights is a term that is appropriate and it usually causes disproportionate casualties for those on lower ground.
 
MedWheeler said:
lemaymiami..
It will be interesting when we learn how many casualties are direct results of hits by bullets, as opposed to injuries sustained during flight from the scene. With a crowd estimated to be 22K in size, the odds are low of being hit, but extremely high of still being seriously injured otherwise.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I'm betting that all of the fatalities were GSW, but that a significant amount of the injuries treated were fall-related or being trampled in the pandemonium, as well as some shrapnel, ricochet and secondary projectile wounds.
 
You can't fight back against that. All you can do is run or find good cover. In a crowd of that size good luck with either one. As events like this become more common a pressure dressing and tourniquet on your person makes a lot of sense.
 
Phaedrus/69 said:
For an outdoor concert at the base of a few buildings it would seem prudent to have a few police snipers positioned at various locations in the surrounding buildings. Obviously a sniper higher up in the same tower wouldn't have a shot but the ones opposite would. But that would cost money.
Click to expand...

Honestly that's not that expensive compared to say the contact to clean up trash. Figure $100 an hour per officer, and you say 10 of them fro 4 hours. $4,000 is some cash, but nothing compared to the other expenses of the venue. The reality is most cities are gonna be on the hook to provide this type of over watch as a public service for free rather then billing the event as it should be. Additionally due to resource constraints for most agencies, you're not going to have 10 SWAT snipers, as the team might only have 4. Realistically you're going to get ten officers who know somebody, who knows somebody, who can get them on the contract to do the security detail (not that I've played this particular type of game before or anything....). You might get lucky and get ten guys who are all shooters, or you might get 10 officers who barely passed their rifle qualification.

-Jenrick
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

SSN Vet
  • Locked
Engaging an AR shooter with handgun
2 3 4
Replies
84
Views
3K
Double Naught Spy
Double Naught Spy
D
  • Locked
Lawyer shooting - extremely poor tactics
Replies
1
Views
498
Jeff White
J
J
  • Locked
University of Iowa Publishes Active Shooter Safety Guidelines
Replies
24
Views
1K
Double Naught Spy
Double Naught Spy
3
  • Locked
"Active Shooter" Phenomenon - LEO Article
Replies
4
Views
943
Jeff White
J
J
  • Locked
Resources for Active Shooter Preparedness and Emergency Action Plans
Replies
11
Views
2K
hso
hso
Back
Top