Here we go again! - Shots fired, hostages, Colorado High School

[FourTeeFive]

"Unfortunately, one of the hostages was killed as was the perp, but the other hostages (all female) survived."

From what I read in the article, there were two girls left in the room when SWAT did their thing. One girl died. I wouldn't exactly call that a great saving of a loss of life.

I'm not going to armchair quarterback this thing, but I do question the "highly trained and qualified" use of explosives and such when entering the room to save the two girls. How often do you think the entering team has done this in real life? Again, it might have been the only thing to do, I don't know. But I do sort of wonder how qualified most local LEO's are to undertake this sort of hostage rescue situation. In this case they had a 50% success rate in keeping the hostages alive (after the others had been let go due to successful negotiating, or just luck).

 

[Desk Jockey]

It's still too early to start second-guessing LE actions. Several articles refer to 'sexual assaults' by this guy on hostages; some articles don't mention it at all. If true, that would certainly factor into any 'go/no-go' decision. There was a Denver-area SWAT team there in addition to the local sheriff. So I assume that the training was not at fault. But it's too early to start assigning blame to anyone but the rat-bxxxxxd who took hostages.

 

[mindwip]

I dont know of any SWAT team that can 100% kill a BD when he has a gun to the head of a hostage. Especially if the BG wants to die, or does not fear death and is in a closed room. IF his gun is pointing at the head of a hostage who is in front of him, then the Swat guys might only see the hostage and not have a clear shot at the BG, until them move to flank him on the sides, this gives the BG time to get off rounds, as he did, one to a Swat member and one to the girl.

I dont think you can blame the Swat team here, unless they broke the door down and waited 5 mins for the BG to shot the hostage.

 

[Coronach]

The "tank" was probably an APC or Peacekeper that was used to position a team close enough to the door to make rapid entry, if need be, and/or to communicate with the hostage taker. Our SWAT team makes use of them on barricade situations, too. In order to talk to the BG you need to get someone close, and when guns are involved you still need to maintain cover. Sometimes the only way to do that is to take your cover with you.

Mike

 

[Larry Ashcraft]

The AP described it as a "tank like SWAT team vehicle".

 

[Coronach]

It's still too early to start second-guessing LE actions. Several articles refer to 'sexual assaults' by this guy on hostages; some articles don't mention it at all. If true, that would certainly factor into any 'go/no-go' decision. There was a Denver-area SWAT team there in addition to the local sheriff. So I assume that the training was not at fault. But it's too early to start assigning blame to anyone but the rat-bxxxxxd who took hostages.

I dont know of any SWAT team that can 100% kill a BD when he has a gun to the head of a hostage. Especially if the BG wants to die, or does not fear death and is in a closed room. IF his gun is pointing at the head of a hostage who is in front of him, then the Swat guys might only see the hostage and not have a clear shot at the BG, until them move to flank him on the sides, this gives the BG time to get off rounds, as he did, one to a Swat member and one to the girl.

I dont think you can blame the Swat team here, unless they broke the door down and waited 5 mins for the BG to shot the hostage.

Entirely too soon to say. In a situation like this you have two competing concerns/drives. One is getting in there and neutralizing the threat, a proactive solution, and the other is to slow everything down and negotiate for a peaceful outcome and/or set up a situation that your tactical team can go in and win. The trouble is that you can never be 100% certain which is the best way to go.

Charging in like Elliot Ness ensures a violent resolution, and can be risky for innocents. However, as Columbine taught us, waiting can be fatal, too. The general idea is that if it is an active shooting you go, if it is a hostage barricade you wait. On the upside (not), if anyone dies besides the BG you know it will be the fault of the SWAT team or incident commander, since he should have waited/gone right in/negotiated/not negotiated/delayed until he had a better set up/quit screwing around and gone in.

Mike

 

[Coronach]

The AP described it as a "tank like SWAT team vehicle".

In other words, it could have been anything with protective armor. Gotta love the drive-by media.

Mike

 

[Desk Jockey]

And the Rocky Mountain News yesterday referenced a "tank used to contain explosives" or something like that. The BG had claimed to have a bomb in his backpack.

The kid who appeared on the "Today" show saying that he tried to stay behind with the girls, now admits that he was never in the room. TV cameras make people do stupid things.

 

[Manedwolf]

With latest reports, yes, he did sexually assault the girls.

We are a nation of victims. He KNEW that there's be no armed response there, I'd bet.

 

[johnsonrlp]

"How's that working for you?" Dr. Phil

Obviously we need to double the penalties for violating the gun free school law. That'll work.:banghead:

 

[FourTeeFive]

"About a half-hour before the deadline, a SWAT team used explosives to blow a hole in a classroom wall in hopes of getting a clear shot at him. When they couldn't see him through the gap, they blew the door off the hinges to get inside, said Lance Clem, a spokesman for the state Department of Public Safety.

Morrison fired at the SWAT officers, shot Keyes as she tried to run away and then killed himself, authorities said. During the gun battle, police shot Morrison several times, they said."

We blew a hole in the wall and then couldn't see... what a surprise. Ok, now I'm more critical of this. HOW many times has this SWAT team successfully used this tactic in the real world, or did it just sound like a good idea?

 

[Spartan08]

The local sheriff is now saying that the weapon he used was a Bushmaster AR-15 "Assault Rifle" which is the "Civilian version of the M-4 military rifle"

 

[DouglasW]

Let's not spread rumors

Spartan08 wrote:

The local sheriff is now saying that the weapon he used was a Bushmaster AR-15 "Assault Rifle" which is the "Civilian version of the M-4 military rifle"

Where'd you hear that? As of 13.30 Denver-time, Rocky Mountain News reports

Preliminary indications are that Emily was shot one time in the head by Morrison by either the .357-Magnum revolver or the Glock semi-automatic pistol he had with him.

An AR-15 semi-automatic rifle found down the road from the school hasn’t been tied into the killer and ATF agents are trying to run down who it belonged to.

 

[Spartan08]

Fox News,

 

[SJG26]

Even worse on CNN.......

"Authorities found a .357 Magnum and an AR-15 Glock on Morrison's body. U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives had traced one of the guns to the Colorado relative who received the letter, Wegener said. "

*** is a "AR-15 Glock"??????

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/US/09/29/school.shooting/index.html

 

[Zen21Tao]

I watched the Sherrifs press conferance and can say that Douglas is dead on. The Sheriff did paint the AT15 as an ultra evil "assault rifle" (a civilian version of a military machinegun). Then the Sheriff pointed out that the AR15 wasn't used in this shooting and hasn't even been (as of yet) linked to gunman. I wonder how many news orginizations are going to mention that vital point.

By the time the Brady crowd get to talking about this event they are going to have a madman spraying down the school with automatic fire from a military assault rifle. :banghead:

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I'll cut the sheriff a small bit of slack in his announcements, because this HAS to be the single most traumatic event to have gone down in his jurisdiction for his entire career. As to the decision to blow the wall, the perp had severed communications after intimating that "something" was going to happen at 4:00 o'clock. Under the circumstances, it was probably reasonable to assume that "something" wasn't going to be a good thing, so a breach assault was probably an okay call. The girl who was killed was trying to run away. Obviously, the SWAT team couldn't predict how either the perp or the hostages would react when they blew the wall, but if the girl had just hit the deck rather than run, there's a chance she might be alive.

I'm certainly not happy that even one student was killed, but I don't really think we can fault the decision to go. I'm quite sure the expectation was that as of 4:02 there would be TWO dead girls and a dead perp.