Dealing with, and practicing for, hostage rescue

Status
Not open for further replies.
And when the hostage panics and does something unpredictable, such as shoots his hostage in the head??? Then what? Congrats, you have the chance to shoot him with a clear shot. But at that point obviously your gamble didn't pay off, and you get to live with it ...
 
I've told my wife that if it's gun pointed at gun I'm going to ask "are you alright?". At that point she is to go absolutely limp at which point she should drop from the BG giving a more clear shot.
Click to expand...
I think this is a "great" plan, for a desperate (and of course, low probability) situation. The "great" is in quotes only because all the options are bad in one way or another--but that is the nature of a desperate situation. Your plan may be one of the best options.

I would suggest a counter-sign from the hostage so that you know the plan is remembered, and that she agrees to act now. She may be spooked, and forget (at least at first) the plan. If you ask, "are you alright?" and she answers "I'm fine" or "I'm scared" or "Help", you couldn't know for sure if she was simply answering or giving a counter-sign. So don't use those phrases as a counter-sign.

Maybe something like, "Stay back, stay back--he means business." That is not a natural response to "Are you all right;" it is a complex phrase; and it is something that the attacker will enjoy hearing. These are all great features for a counter-sign. Translated, it means, "I will drop within the next 5 seconds."
And when the hostage panics and does something unpredictable, such as shoots his hostage in the head??? Then what?
Click to expand...
If the hostage-taker is that jumpy, then perhaps that outcome is inevitable--might be caused by the police showing up. Not every situation has a solution. But I am not going to let the knowledge that anything I do--including wait for the police--might lead to the worst outcome paralyze me.

We all have our choices to make, and no matter if we are Pollyannas, Eeyores, or Geckos, whatever choice we make could lead to the death of the hostage. We can't control what we can't control. So I focus on what I can control: no hostage-taker is going to leave my house with a family member. Period. Decided. Explained to my family.

I will give him many options to leave, but he will not leave with a hostage.

There are no statitics that can "prove" what the right thing to do will be, so there isn't a "right" answer here. I understand that you have an opinion on what would be best for all of us; and perhaps that the police will always arrive in time and always do the right thing; and the hostage will always survive. And that's fine. But deciding to stand down and wait for the police is also a decision, and could also lead to the hostage's death.

What if the hostage-taker demands your gun? Another hostage? Just give him anything he wants until the police arrive?

If you'll be able to live with your decision to stand down if that results in the hostage's death, then please expect that I'll be able to live with my decision.

(It is interesting: this is Strategies, Tactics and Training. Its very nature means thinking about low probability situations and deciding a best solution--even if there are no good solutions. Yet, we are hearing that this is too improbable even to talk about, and that the right tactical play is "give up and wait for the police." I guess that could be the answer to any tactical question posed here.

Fine, but the gentleman doesn't seem to have entered into the spirit of the forum. Or seems to believe he's the only one who's figured out: this is serious stuff--someone could get KILLED! ;):D)
 
Last edited:
Since you won't be there, your "leave it to us" attitude has no traction, despite your experience as a hostage rescue ballerino.
Click to expand...

Then if you are concerned about this <one-in-a million scenario, I suggest you regularly practice the scenario on the range with hostage/BG targets, and off the range with the possible victims. If everything doesn't go just right in a real situation, the only one walking away will be the BG.
 
Last edited:
Kevin, this thread IS about practicing on and off the range, developing confidence, and having a strategy in place. Your input on specific strategies would be welcome by me and other members as well.

Don't think I don't see where you are coming from. Unfortunately the gap in mindset, training, and skill between a SWAT guy and a typical CCW guy is so huge that it might be reasonable for you to feel that you don't want to give someone the false hope that, with minimal training and skill, they can pull something like this off. I get that. However, the gap can be bridged...it's unfortunate that it rarely is though.

Here is a single data-point to remind us that it is possible for someone to win the day in a low-probability, low-percentage situation, through properly directed aggression, utilizing speed and confidence:

A woman fed her 1-year-old son in a bedroom one evening while her other boys, ages 15 and 8, relaxed elsewhere in the home. None of them knew that two masked men toting illegal guns lurked just outside. The men kicked in the door and aimed their guns at the 15-year-old, then at his mother when she tried to intervene. The men demanded cash and asked for two people by name, neither of whom was known to the woman nor her children. Fortunately the woman’s boyfriend arrived at the home soon thereafter, heard the commotion and retrieved his firearm. The boyfriend darted into the room and shot both intruders before they knew what was happening. The intruders ran into a bedroom, broke a window and fled. They were arrested when they showed up at the hospital suffering from gunshot wounds and covered in shards of glass. (The News-Gazette, Champaign, IL, 10/08/11)
Click to expand...

http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/12086/armed-citizen-21/

Of course, he clearly needs to work on accuracy a little...:evil:
 
If everything doesn't go just right in a real situation, the only one walking away will be the BG.
Click to expand...
Actually, that's what happens if everything does go just right: the BG will walk away. I and the hostage will stay, unharmed. No shots fired. All other outcomes are worse, with some much worse than others.

But your suggestion is noted.
 
So if we rule out the above and say you hear your kid cry for help, or whatever, and you need to take care of the problem - and you believe it may be a "shooting problem" - what is the best approach? I'm interested in hearing responses.
Click to expand...

Keeping it simple:

1. Be as unthreatening as possible. If you have a weapon, don't point it at him but let him see it.
2. Don't box-in the BG; give him an easy avenue of escape and suggest it to him.
3. Don't give in to the BG. Don't become a second hostage.
4. Let him know that if the hostage is harmed, you will harm him. Give him an alternative solution (escape).
5. Tell him that as long as he doesn't harm the hostage he hasn't done anything wrong. If he wants to take the hostage with him, talk him out of it as he would then have crossed the line between 'nothing wrong' and 'something wrong'.
6. Tell him anything you need to to get him to leave empty-handed.
7. If you feel the need to take a shot, don't try it unless your skill level is sufficient to solve the problem.
 
My cue is "Easy, she has low blood sugar" And her response is "I'm going to faint" Then drop.

BAM!
 
7. If you feel the need to take a shot, don't try it unless your skill level is sufficient to solve the problem.
Click to expand...
Let me reposition this question a little. Suppose I needed to take a shot at an attacker for my own SD; meaning, I was convinced that if I didn't, I would die or be crippled in the next few moments. Would your advice be, "Don't take the shot unless your skill level is sufficient to solve the problem"?

Similarly, if I NEED to take the shot in the hostage situation, I will take the shot. If I have the OPTION of taking the shot, I will decline. Again, need being defined as, if I don't take the shot in the next few moments, then the hostage will end up maimed or killed--either right now, or at the kidnapper's convenience (if I allow him to leave with the hostage).

Allowing him to leave with the hostage is not an option for me; if he's about to do that, or about to shoot me, or about to shoot the hostage, then I need to shoot.

JMHO. I agree with your other 6 points.
 
Loosedhorse said:
Allowing him to leave with the hostage is not an option for me; if he's about to do that, or about to shoot me, or about to shoot the hostage, then I need to shoot.
Click to expand...

I'd have to agree with this. Letting the attacker take a hostage to a second crime scene is not something I could justify with letting myself do. Good men, inaction, evil, and all that.

And for those of you saying this could never happen, just last month a naked man held a woman hostage in the grocery store I always go to. Unarmed, but it still highlights that these kinds of situations do happen. If you're going to depend on statistics and not train, then that .01% of the time you DO get involved in a situation like this, there's no chance you can do the right thing. As always, prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
 
I live in a nice normal Mayberry like town in a very nice little subdivision.
This very thing took place at the middle of my street. Little to much to drink and a heated argument between a Woman and her live in Male companion and the next thing you know she has a pistol to her head in the front yard.
The local LEO's handled it very well and nobody got shot; BUT
It happens.
Is it worthy of your time to train for? Thats up to you.
At up to 25 feet I would feel very confident in making that shot as soon as the gun was aimed at me and not the hostage.
 
I was 25 when I went through hostage rescue training, the hostage takers were all special forces, the hostages were police recruits, the HRT were also police recruits. Everytime we tried a rescue the hostages died.
 
george - what factors resulted in "hostage" deaths, in your opinion?
 
The odds are always with the hostage takers which is why SWAT usually will wait-it-out before they are forced to enter. There were some cases where waiting didn't help and the hostages were taken for the purpose of being killed, Beslan and Maalot come to mind. I am a really decent shot and I have no idea what I would do if I had to shoot with a hostage used a cover.
In my training, there were actually trip wires, LP's that threw grenades or fired at us when we approached (enabling the hostage takers to know that a rescue was being attempted).
If I was to decide on the best approach to killing a hostage taker it would be a sniper. There's just no way to sneak up on an alert hostage taker and unlike TV, not all of them are there for the negotiations but those that are will usually negotiate after a few hours.
In Albuquerque we have 2-3 SWAT situations every week that usually turn into all-nighters that 99% of the time end in a tired hostage and a handcuffed felon.

I think that the biggest factor in our hostage deaths were that we didn't train for hostage rescue 8 hours a day as does HRT and SWAT.
 
Interesting thoughts, thanks.

I guess my question should have been better phrased...I was wondering what the common circumstances leading to the role-player hostage death usually were. Did you notice that rescuers shot the hostage much?
 
Let me reposition this question a little. Suppose I needed to take a shot at an attacker for my own SD; meaning, I was convinced that if I didn't, I would die or be crippled in the next few moments. Would your advice be, "Don't take the shot unless your skill level is sufficient to solve the problem"?

Similarly, if I NEED to take the shot in the hostage situation, I will take the shot. If I have the OPTION of taking the shot, I will decline. Again, need being defined as, if I don't take the shot in the next few moments, then the hostage will end up maimed or killed--either right now, or at the kidnapper's convenience (if I allow him to leave with the hostage).

Allowing him to leave with the hostage is not an option for me; if he's about to do that, or about to shoot me, or about to shoot the hostage, then I need to shoot.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges. The shoot/don't shoot decision you need to make in your first scenario is totally different from your 2nd scenario. In your first scenario you have nothing to lose if you shoot; the shot will either hit the BG or it won't. However, in the 2nd scenario, a bad shot might hit the hostage, or cause him to shoot that person, or continue to hide behind his hostage and blast away at you, forcing you to take further bad shots.

But if the hostage was my ex-wife, close your eyes and blast away! :evil:
 
Did you notice that rescuers shot the hostage much?
Click to expand...
We never got close enough to perform a shot. This was a two day workshop and it was meant to instill in us the understanding that hostage rescue was best left to the experts and that our job was to secure the perimeter. It was also a learning experience that if we were forced to make a rescue, the difficulties that could stand in our way. I should mention that the training was totally an anti-terrorist hostage rescue workshop which is probably way different than a lone gunman situation, however, even a lone gunman that is deluded is going to pose a different problem than one that is not.
I recall the scene in HEAT where Tom Sizemore grabs a little girl to use as a human shield and his total disregard for her life. This is another scenario that could be common. There are too many factors in a hostage situation and many times waiting it out is the right way to go. I think that if one can communicate with the villian/s then shooting is not usually an option. Now if it was Kevins ex-wife that's a different story. :D
 
Everytime we tried a rescue the hostages died.
Click to expand...
We can't eliminate the possibility that this was completely due to an artifact in the training scenario. I know of a similar situation where a real-life successful hostage rescue team was introduced to a training scenario and could not rescue the hostage (or the hostage taker). The team was confused, and frankly upset, especially as the "hostage" was a team member. In their after-analysis they found out that the hostage-taker had zero belief that he would survive the scenario, so he trusted no offers and always shot first.

There's more than one lesson there. But one lesson is that training is not reality.
This was a two day workshop and it was meant to instill in us the understanding that hostage rescue was best left to the experts
Click to expand...
Exactly. Since the PURPOSE of the "training" was to convince you you couldn't hack it, the scenarios (and the players) were chosen to deliver that message. Had the purpose been different, the message and methods would have been different.
Apples and oranges. The shoot/don't shoot decision you need to make in your first scenario is totally different
Click to expand...
Your opinion. In mine, it's apples to apples. You say I have "nothing to lose" in the first scenario; yet in the second, as the hostage is about to be shot, or I am about to be shot, or the hostage is about to be taken to a secondary crime scene, I also "have nothing to lose."

Actually, in both scenarios, I have an awful lot to lose with a bad shot (or no shot), and an awful lot to gain with a good shot. Apples to apples.
 
Last edited:
I agree with your analysis but I also will add that if one were in a position where they and only they could rescue their family member from a hostage situation (no police available as in Open Range with Kevin Costner), then I would seek to close the distance as much as possible to the point of actually pushing the barrel in the perps mouth or against their temple. Make my day! Under this scenario one needs to confront the fact that someone is going to die. The best solution would be to have a long arm properly sighted with a very accurate laser sight.
 
Loosedhorse said:
Exactly. Since the PURPOSE of the "training" was to convince you you couldn't hack it, the scenarios (and the players) were chosen to deliver that message. Had the purpose been different, the message and methods would have been different.
Click to expand...

Took the words out of my mouth. To paraphrase a poster from another forum, FOF should at least give participants the tools to solve the problem, even if it's a difficult situation. It should encourage success not failure.

That is IMO an egregious example of "training" and could have been covered in a lecture without instilling the tendency to fail in its participants.
 
Too many possibilities to actually discuss on a forum. if you feel that hostage rescue is something you may be confronted with then get real life training, lectures and online forums do nothing. I know what I know and agree with Harry Callahan who said, A man has to know his limitations.
 
Last edited:
Until one has actually taken such a shot or at least received extensive training under extreme situations that induce great stress you have NO idea if you have the ability to make such a shot.

In regards to training i'll spend my time on scenarios that i've seen more than just one incident of.
 
JustinJ said:
Until one has actually taken such a shot or at least received extensive training under extreme situations that induce great stress you have NO idea
Click to expand...

I think "NO idea" is overstating it a little.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
Take the shot?
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
HankB
H
M
  • Locked
Panama City School Board Hostage Situatuation and Shooting w/ Video
2 3
Replies
62
Views
2K
answerguy
A
N
  • Locked
Desert Marksman Moving Target Match
Replies
5
Views
406
natedog
N
R
  • Locked
Hostage Taker Targets
Replies
10
Views
1K
DonGlock26
D
ACP
  • Locked
Shooting/hostages in Tacoma, Washington mall
Replies
1
Views
482
Kaylee
K
Back
Top