Homeland Security Procedures for An Active Shooter

ActiveShooterTraining1_1_t670

Fox News reported on Arizona Border Patrol Agents who are questioning DHS procedures regarding an Active Shooter. Apparently the procedures apply to not only civilians but armed law enforcement as well.

The summary of the procedure is when encountering an active shooter, individuals should try to run away and hide. If that is not an option, then throw objects at the active shooter. Only as a last resort should armed law enforcement use lethal force.

Here is the link to the FEMA-adminstered computer course, IS-907- Active Shooter: What You Can Do.



Nicholas C

Co-Founder of KRISSTALK forums, an owner’s support group and all things KRISS Vector related. Nick found his passion through competitive shooting while living in NY. He participates in USPSA and 3Gun. He loves all things that shoots and flashlights. Really really bright flashlights.

Any questions please email him at nicholas.c@staff.thefirearmblog.com


Advertisement

  • Wetcoaster

    Doesn’t that contradict every armed police SOP regarding active shooters?

    • Yup, I was always told that modern police SOP evolved from a “contain and negotiate” style response to “go in and get him.”

      It seems extremely odd that this procedure would be applicable to both Law Enforcement and civilians . . . but I suppose stranger things have happened.

      • FartSmeller

        I work LE in a city with a population of about 1.2 million.

        Our SOP for such an event is to enter the structure and neutralize the threat. The change in SOP was put into play following Columbine, wherein the suspects were still shooting will SWAT was being paged out.

        We run scenarios w/ Simunitions to learn how to best function in teams of 2, 3, or 4, since that’s most likely what you’ll have on hand when the shooting starts.

        • dan

          My brother who is a part of the local “SWAT” team let me be an active shooter when their team was training the other officers to go in and kill the guy with the gun. Watching all the regular cops trying to throw out everything they learned prior to that was kind of funny as was the ass chewings they got when I finally got tired of holding a struggling screaming hostage(my GF btw) and shot her.

          After a few scenarios the officers started to accept the fact that they or the hostage may get shot, but they have got to stop me at all costs.

          It was a fun time, not many times you get to shoot at cops while calling them pigs and not end up in a body bag. Although I think when cuffing me they may have been a little rougher than normal. Lol

          • Sulaco

            Man has the thinking on this changed. During the Good Will Games in Seattle we trained with US Marines who were assigned to the games. One exercise had an armed “shooter” holding a hostage at the base of the stairwell at the aquatics pool. We were at the top of the concrete stairwell looking down. When the “shooter” pushed the “hostage” to the ground one of our (BF) patrol officers “shot” him. The Maine command staff higher ups wanted our officer disciplined because of her “rash” actions. Needless to say our Lt pulled her aside and gave her a severe good job. Several years later we were “trained” on active shooter response in a school. The highers thinking at the time was to have all the officers stand shoulder to shoulder and march towards the shooter and over whelm him with firepower. Again that plan, based on our “over whelming advantage of body armor and semi auto pistols” was the reason for this abortion of a plan. Now after CQB training for all, its first two on scene, rifles in hand go in and take out anyone shooting kids. There is nothing more stuck in dinosaur thinking then
            police command staff. When I started speed loaders were verboten as “too aggressive”, semi auto pistols will get us in trouble, too much firepower and no black rifles….

          • The Brigadier

            Welcome to Progressive America. Lunacy at its best.

          • yo

            Firearms. Not Politics. RTFM, general.

          • Totenkopf

            The cops main duty is to themselves and living to collect their pension. Everything else is collateral damage.

      • Anonymos

        My LE training for active shooter taught “stop the killing”. Was the only training I had where they taught that “officer safety” came second. That being said, they did mention that plain clothes/off duty officers might be weary of entering as they may be identified as an active shooter by uniformed officers. I ignore that though, I’d rather take my chances in stead of waiting around while little kids are being killed

        • Agreed—-

        • “I’d rather take my chances in stead of waiting around while little kids are being killed…”

          Sure. But it does mean that off-duty officers (or armed auxiliaries in my case) need to give some serious thought to how they will communicate with the response being initiated. So, in addition to having a carry piece, that also means a cell, a radio, and credentials. I spend a lot of time off-duty but on-call, so I have a compact kit with the radio, flash light, first-aid kit, ID, credentials, china marker, key excerpts from the EOP and ICS forms. We always have jackets and safety vests in the vehicle. I’d like to be able to fit a decent-quality compact collapsible vest or SO windbreaker in the kit but so far haven’t been able to make it work well.

          Not being Licensed Peace Officers, we are not authorized to ‘go in after them’, but our SOP is to hold position, protect civilians around/behind us, start medical response if possible, and establish communication. That potentially gives the 2nd responders a beachhead to work from and keeps the active shooter from expanding their area of operation. If the shooters come at, us, we do whatever we need to do to protect life. In order for any of that to work, however, we have to be able to talk to the LPOs coming in. The region has established procedures for what channels and means to use to do that when we happen to be at ground-zero from the start. A big issue is if the first arrivals are off-duty LPOs who are not on-radio, have not checked-in with Dispatch, and potentially don’t know we are there, especially if we are outside our normal operating area and are not immediately recognized. There is only so much you can do to avoid that potential confusion.

          • seriously?

            What the fuck bullshit is an armed auxiliary? Sorry man, you sound high drag, low speed– wannabe. How should you “communicate with the response being initiated?” Stop dressing up like a cop. Get the eff out of the way. If you are a cilivian, and there is an active shooter and the cops are already responding… go away.

            What’s next, you going to get a scapel and a surgical mask and hang out in front the hospital just in case the neurosurgeon in the OR wants to expand his area operation into your beach-head? Come on dude.

          • “What the fuck bullshit is an armed auxiliary? ”

            They are not common now in the US, but they used to be, are coming back in vogue and still are active in Illinois. This one is in Missouri. Citizen’s constabulary used to be another term to mean an auxiliary force trained and organized for call up by the police.

            I am a commissioned county officer under the local Sheriff with no arrest powers and in command of the county Auxiliary. Among other things, we exist to provide additional manpower in disasters (inc perimeter control, site security, force protection for other responders), supplement patrols, provide routine capabilities such as law enforcement chaplains, communications support, and an intelligence section, and— particular to this conversation— to disperse trained responders in the community ahead of no-notice incidents. We are therefore sometimes first-on-scene just by chance and we follow whatever our protocol is until we can hand-off to the next level of response. As mentioned in my previous post, we are armed, on-call, carry law enforcement radios, uniformed if on-duty, and are authorized to use force to protect life (not property unless given orders by an LPO or deputized), which makes us a bit different than the reserve deputies.

            We take some training alongside the deputies in the Law Enforcement Academies (one ongoing now), take/teach customized courses for the volunteers and community, and have some training in our specialized roles not held by the deputies. In particular, we do a lot more training in small teams (quads) than the deputies currently do and are usually employed that way. A single deputy or municipal officer in control of one or two quads of trained volunteers becomes a significant force-multiplier.

          • seriously?

            There is only so much you can do?!? How about YOU don’t create the confusion in the first place?

          • “How about YOU don’t create the confusion in the first place?”

            I think it is accurate to say that it is the active shooter who creates the confusion in that situation, not the responder. No plan survives contact with the enemy. No matter how well you plan or train for it, stuff is still going to go wrong because that’s just how it works. As the poster above says, however, it is well worth it to do what you can even knowing that it could all go south— or more to the point, that it *already* has gone south as soon as the active shooter opened up.

            What is your alternative, sitting there with your member in your hands and watch people get shot? Having been through a situation like that where there simply wasn’t anything which could be done and having to live with it, I won’t be caught— by choice— in that circumstance again. If I can, I will stop the shooter. If I can’t do that, I will protect others. If I can’t do that, I will help the wounded. If I can’t do *any of those things*, I will stand in front of someone else. If you don’t like my choice… well, tough.

    • Yes it does. Foolish advice that’s for sure!

      • Totenkopf

        Cop training: Spray N’ Pray.

        • AK™

          Sponsored Training provided by the NYPD™

          😉

  • A.g.

    “then throw objects at the active shooter”

    A 9mm bullet would be the kind of “objects” that I prefers to throw than anything else if I am in this situation.

    I read with smile the new world order conspiracy théories but i’m slighty afraid about seing USA becoming French.
    And I’m french myself, please take no offenses.

    • KestrelBike

      I for one, am happy to convert to the metric system to deal with these threats. Let’s start with 9mm, 5.56mm, etc.

      • A.g.

        You’re damn imperial system…
        Best and only common reference point approved : pints

      • Anonymoose

        I’d throw some 7.62x63mm at any active shooter.

        • Zachary marrs

          .30-06 for an active shooter? Hell yeah

    • steveday72

      Throwing lead at a high velocity was my first thought too.

    • Forrest

      As a french guy, you should then know that active shooters are immediately shot down, even in communist countries like France.
      If the LEO is a “gendarme”, he has even the right to shoot you down in the back if you just escape while not armed and handcuffed. It happens several times a year.

      • A.g.

        Unfortunately no. As a LEO myself I can provide you some précisions. My apologies for some bad grammary first. Lack of practice
        The law was no longer anymore be so permissive with the french gendarmerie since his management was under control of the Ministère de l intérieur, despiste they stay organicly a military corps. They don’t really like it by the way.
        Some use of lethal force was reproached by the judges in trial and their décisions makes law. One sample was the case of open fire to a fleing car who force a control with the legal owner of the véhicule kidnaped in the truck (of course unknow parameter) killed by one military projectile. The gendarme has been sue for unattended murder despite the text of law “protecting” him. Kind of legal décision who cool down any further initiative.
        Same thing for the detention personnel. Open fire against fleing inmate was no more alowed. The immediate dangerosity is not established.
        An officer who shot a man who just throw an defective grenade in his back after shooting them with firearms was prosecute for attempt murder on the suspect. This had engaged a wide and big movement of protest, many patrol car on champs elysées famous avenue etc… But the files is not closed.
        Use of weapons is only allowed if the life of the LEO or someone else immediately near was in danger but in case of massive shooting or any critical situation the protocol to follow is designed, ironicly, by the acronym A.R.M.E (wich means weapons in french) for Alerter (alert) Renseigner (inform the command center) Maintenir l ordre ( evac in calm, freeze the area), Enqueter (investigate) and let the swat team french équivalent manage the event. So not immediately neutralized. Be sure this method allow one time to an hijacker in a fastfood in a failed armed robbery to escape.
        In Toulouse shooting, an entranched terrorist, the order was to catch him alive first. Five RAID officers wounded.
        You ve got law as they are wroten and you have the reading of the judges.
        Two last samples.
        First one : an armed robber turn back kills with his shootgun the man following him : unintentional homicide.
        Second :an old man kills his burglar with his rifle, by night, in his home : intentional murder. Despite a clear text of law for this case discharging you of pursuit ( art 122.6 french penal code like castle doctrine).
        I will provide any more case further with better keyboard if necessary but you have full of law who were neutralized by lower text or oral order (use of baton for officer, same for 40mm rubber bullet strictly allowed to stay on office)

        • Forrest

          Ok, you know your job. I’m french, too. I have only the average “common media” point of view. The french Gendarmerie has suffered a lot from the police formatting process started in 2009…

        • squareWave

          My understanding is the French police are currently equipped with Speer’s Gold Dot hollow point. This is an excellent choice. The rest of Europe seems to still use archaic FMJ.

          • Forrest

            Maybe “A.g.” will more explain this fact, but France was with FMJ until a policeman had to open fire on an attacker. The bullet hit the assailant, but also killed someone else behind after overpenetration. This was the french “Miami shootout”.

          • A.g.

            @squareWave:disqus :

            Absolutely right. Overpenetrating and defectuous rounds from lower bid supplier make the French police switch to gold dot with a special marking on the case to “identify” the ammo.

            @Forrest

            I have hear something like that but honestly, I can certify who, where, when. This debate rise by the past, when we have old .38 revolver,when a female policeman shoot an offender in the subway and when the round rebound to the ceramic wall to the surface, killing a chinese tourist. This kind of event just happens in Marseille in a shootout who wound an woman like that.

            With the 9mm Para I don’t know. Nevertheless rumors of old berretta sd12 (9 mm) could be replaced by H&K G36
            in 5.56mm. Kind of logic…

          • Forrest

            I was referring to the “Granomort” case. But once again, this is a “Joe Blow” point of view.

          • The Brigadier

            Archaic FMJ? Really? You mean like the ammo that most every military in the world uses? Are you trying to say that every army in the world is using inferior ammunition? Surely not.

          • squareWave

            For police use FMJ is absolutely archaic and inferior. This is not debatable. Militaries have different considerations, among them reliability in open bolt automatic weapons, and of course the Hague Accords which prohibit “inhumane” bullets.

  • echelon

    Yes let’s throw things at the guy currently shooting people. That’ll get their attention! Maybe they’ll be kind enough to sling a few objects at you in return while you’re crouched in the corner in a puddle of your own urine…

    What reality do these people live in? Do they walk around in some lucid dream-like state where no such thing as evil exists?

    • dan

      They know evil exists, but they would rather try to appease it and hope that it will go away.

      • echelon

        I would have to respectfully disagree. A lot of these types of people I talk to flat out live in a make believe, made up world of fiction. In their reality everything is what they make it and evil has no place in it. When it does rear it’s ugly head as a nightmare in their dreamland then their response is typical of someone in that situation…they pee themselves and pray that it’ll end and they’ll wake up soon!

    • Porty1119

      Throw things? Let’s start with an M67 fragmentation grenade.

    • Phil Hsueh

      I have to agree, throwing things at a shooter and thereby getting their attention would not be the smartest thing to do in active situation, not unless you have a first class arm equivalent to at least a top ranking college baseball player, and have something to throw that will actually cause bodily harm to the shooter if hit. I’d think that the best thing to do in active situation would be to do your best to not draw attention to yourself and figure out a way to get out of the line of fire or at least stay hidden. This is assuming, of course, that you’re unarmed.

  • big daddy

    How about harsh language. Reality is copying a Sci-Fi movie, this reminds me of “The Demolition Man” with Stallone & Sandra Bullshit I mean Sandra Bullock. Her movie “Gravity” was terrible and just annoying. If someone is shooting people they have to be stopped ASAP, the best way is a bullet to the head, period. I’m no ultra-conservative but this liberal anti-gun mentality is wrong, ignorant and uninformed. It’s called courage, the courage to do something and stop the violence. It takes dedicated people to do that and most LEO are!!! This type of mentality makes LE even more of a target. People that are going out and committing crimes have no respect for the citizens much less the law, they must face the consequences of their actions. There’s no room for violent criminals in a civilized society, for that matter criminals of any kind.

  • 33AD

    Summarized as “bahhh bahhh lil’ sheep”.

  • Ralph

    Just went through the entire training, there is no place saying that law enforcement should hide or evacuate. On the contrary, it tells us (civilians) to be prepared to see LEOs coming in and that their first priority will not be us, but to neutralize the threat. Who gave you guys this information?

    • Fox News—

      • Markus

        Well, there’s your problem…

        • Yep

          • Michael Valera

            Ya because Fox News is totally “fair and balanced” and does not at all try and show how the federal government is always doing a terrible job, unless the president is a Republican, so that the people that watch Fox come away with a negative view of the Federal Gov in general and Democrats in particular… No not their MO at all. Perish the thought!

            Yes let’s totally be fair to Fox and not recognize obvious distorted “facts”.

          • DaveP.

            This has been a paid advertisement of the Democratic National Committee.

          • squareWave

            One could argue the Big 3 and the daily broadsheets have been doing the reverse for 50 years.

            Journalistic impartiality is about as common as Bigfoot. That’s why I prefer the British papers, their editorial biases are not disguised.

          • The Brigadier

            Watched CNN or MSNBC lately Mikey? Fox sometimes gets it wrong, the other two always do. They also lie about it and fabricate stories as necessary. CNN did the latter twice and had the decency to fire the reporters. MSNBC has done it five times now and were successfully sued over three of the fabricated stories. They have not fired any of the liars.

            My favorite was Toure railing about Arizona’s open carry laws and their vid showed a man’s back and an AR strapped across it. Toure began ranting about white Teaparty members. Fox picked this up from viewers and got the same video Toure doctored. The real vid was expanded to show the man’s head and neck, and the carrier was a black man. So much for Democrat honesty and integrity.

    • “Just went through the entire training…”

      Ditto. I took it some weeks ago just to check it off. It’s not a terribly useful course, but nowhere does it say for LE (off-duty or otherwise) to run and hide. It’s possible that the miscommunication is in recommending that people in LE roles take the course, but it is intended for people in *staff positions* within LE and Emergency Management organizations, not for LE’s themselves.

  • flyingburgers

    Spotted within 30 seconds from the FEMA link

    • TFB Reader

      I’m not sure if you pointed this out in an attempt to point out the real purpose of the training or not, but assuming that’s your intent, +1.

      If anyone else takes the time to review the material (There’s a text version if you don’t want to sit through the video.), it should be obvious that it was intended for unarmed workers in DHS offices, not for “first responders.” Fox News quoting a union leader as a reliable source? Geez.

      • Bill

        Exactly.
        This came out several years ago to much yowling and consternation that amounted to exactly nothing. The Border Patrol in particular and DHS LEOs are more than willing to shoot anyone who needs to be shot

      • flyingburgers

        Actually, it was to point out the blatant English error, but I’ll take credit for being relevant.

    • Grindstone50k

      Does Law Inforcement arrive before or after Law Enforcement?

      • flyingburgers

        The first tier. The backups would be Law Reinforcement.

      • Totenkopf

        The best way to avoid capture by LE is to throw a box of Krispy Kremes at them.

  • Siggi

    Is this article the result of a reading comprehension fail or is it intentional click bait?

    • Fox news would have to answer that one:-)

    • From the Fox News article:

      It’s one thing to tell civilian employees to cower under a desk if a gunman starts spraying fire in a confined area, say members of Tucson Local 2544/National Border Patrol Council, but to give armed law enforcement professionals the same advice is downright insulting. The instructions from DHS come in the form of pamphlets and a mandatory computer tutorial.

      “We are now taught in an ‘Active Shooter’ course that if we encounter a shooter in a public place we are to ‘run away’ and ‘hide’” union leader Brandon Judd wrote on the website of 3,300-member union local. “If we are cornered by such a shooter we are to (only as a last resort) become ‘aggressive’ and ‘throw things’ at him or her. We are then advised to ‘call law enforcement’ and wait for their arrival (presumably, while more innocent victims are slaughtered).”

      • Mystick

        Yeah, that’s some Grade-A BS right there. If they have the tools, they have the responsibility. I couldn’t imagine what they are going to have to go through while watching innocent people die while their hands are bound with misguided, ill-informed bureaucratic shackles…

        I couldn’t hold fast while people were dying just because of some BS memo on response doctrine.

    • Totenkopf

      Click bait.

  • Aaron E

    As a Law Enforcement Active Shooter Response instructor I’m not sure where you are getting your reference to these procedures being for “law enforcement” as well. If you go through the course it is apparent that the intended audience is non-armed civilians and non-armed government employees who may face this type of threat.
    The standard for law enforcement response is still the same – respond immediately to the threat (the active shooter), isolate the threat from victims, and if necessary eliminate the threat from doing more harm. “If necessary” means that by law police cannot simply go on an execution mission – if they get to the active shooter and he surrenders they are duty bound to take him into custody for trial. Hard to swallow yes, but legally correct.
    This program is actually a decent and simple step approach to provide potential civilian victims with a plan to survive. First – (RUN) if you can get out of the area of the shooter than DO IT! Second – (HIDE) if you cannot get away without danger than hide, and barricade yourself into as secure a location as possible. Finally – (FIGHT) if the killer is coming to you use whatever means you have available to fight back. This program or similar programs are being taught across the country to civilians.
    A simple approach, but easily remembered as well. Without any plan at all you get chaos, or complete mental shut down, that usually results in more casualties.

    • Yellow Devil

      Unfortunately, Soldiers in the U.S. Army (I’m assuming the same for other branches too) are given the same advise as well. Granted, Soldiers outside of official duty are not allowed to carry personal firearms (which I disagree strongly against) but as it stands, they are treated the same as DoD civilians.

      • whskee

        I know I’ve seen it on the Navy side too. Disgusting. My boys are land-side, and no joke veteran shooters from Iraq and Afghanistan. I don’t believe a real active shooter would get far before one of the boys popped ’em with a personal. “Life over law” I’ve heard said many a day when the subject comes up. And I agree. I don’t understand why it shouldn’t be up to Commanders Discretion to decide to allow concealed carry. As I understand it, Clinton revoked our on-base arms during his administration?

    • William o. B’livion.

      How about yup trust the employees to protect themselves?

      Oh, that would require you let them be armed. Never mind.

    • Nicholas C

      If you look at the article from Fox News, it is the Border Patrol Agents who are being instructed to run and hide. Are Border Patrol not considered Law Enforcement?

      • Grindstone50k

        If you look at the source, not the Fox News sensationalism, it is the UNARMED DHS office workers who are being instructed to run and hide.

      • Aaron E

        Nicholas it looks like there is a communication break down at CBP if the union rep thinks that the training video was meant to instruct law enforcement officers. Unfortunately he reports that to the media (probably without actually viewing the video) – because you can’t watch and think its training for law enforcement.
        Since some of the “brass” or higher ups in the Federal system are appointed and not veteran law enforcement there is a possibility that some paper pusher up high sent out a memo ordering the “new” active shooter training be taught.
        Thankfully it sounds like the actual law enforcment officers have seen right through it and are still going after the threat.

  • Tom Currie

    My God! People are yapping about a year old online course intended for civilians! At the time that course was being developed, “run away and call for help” WAS pretty much the recommended procedure for both civilians and professionals, including individual LEOs who might happen to be in the immediate area. The concept was to clear out the area and THEN send in a deliberate response with proper equipment. That guidance has been modified more than once since that course was written, but it still reflects the general advice for everyone other than a LEO, and remains close to the advice for most individual LEOs since even a level IIIA soft vest is typically useless.

    • Bill

      It’s a little frightening: lack of reading comprehension, critical thinking and common sense, presumably by people who are armed. EVERY training for LEOs that I’ve attended or am aware of holds that you go in and stop the threat, right now. Civilians may shelter in place or run, situation dependent.

      Union reps are just as political and inclined to twist words and situations as the people they negotiate against.

    • Aaron E

      Agreed, except for the individual LEO thought. The current teaching (10+ years old) is for any armed officer to respond immediately to try to eliminate the threat. Even individual officers. Yes, typical patrol body armor is not perfect, but the Priority of Life scale recognized by law enforcement dicatates immediate action. To wait for a deliberate response means allowing more killing.
      Priority of Life:
      Hostages/victims
      Innocent bystanders
      Police/Emergency personnel
      Suspects
      In active shooter situations police are expected to keep victims and innocent lives above their own – meaning, go on the pursuit right away.

  • Pete Sheppard

    I try to frequent places where “FIGHT, run, hide” is a realistic response spectrum.

  • waltherp

    Why don’t they just do what the city police are training to do…shoot everyone in the room, then check IDs….

    • Sulaco

      OK have ask for a source for that 30 seconds of hate…

    • dan citizen

      Damn, that teacher must have been a shooter too….

  • Nicks87

    “Only as a last resort should armed law enforcement use lethal force.”
    I cant believe TFB would even post that nonsense.

    • dan citizen

      They are safe so long as they hide behind they’re unicornT

    • Phil Hsueh

      Why, it’s not like TFB is the one telling law enforcement to do so, they are merely reporting what someone else has said. So you’re saying that TFB should not post anything anybody says that might not be received in the most positive of light?

      • Nicks87

        Well considering Phil W. is a 30 year veteran LEO he should know better. I work in federal law enforcement (firearms instructor) and I can assure you that FEMA is NOT telling LEOs to run and hide. People need to use some common sense and stop believing what the mainstream media is shoveling.

  • A.g.

    So,if I understand the real problem is unarmed personnel facing the same threat more than DHS instruction ?

  • blanddragon

    Frost: “Hey, what the hell are we supposed to use man? Harsh language?”

  • dan citizen

    DHS procedure for active shooter:

    1) increase budget 300%
    2) MRAPs for all DHS personnel
    3) TSA checkpoints at all fast food drive through
    4) Make up story about how DHS really stops 500 active shooters daily, but it’s classified.

  • Fox218

    Lost me at Fox News.

  • dntmkmecomoverther

    Folks here’s the reality: If you have an active shooter, he/she will only be active for 3-4 minutes at the most. LE will not likely arrive after being dispatched for up to 5-7 minutes at the best (for numerous reasons). So unarmed people are ‘on their own’ during such an event. Best scenario: Know how to carry, use and shoot your own weapon. Be trained, be proficient, be aware…so that when LE does arrive, you’re not the one they step over as they make out their dreadful report.

  • mytraintrax

    Better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6!!!

  • notANewBie

    I TOOK THE COURSE. Makes sense. What’s the problem??

  • AmericanIcon

    By the time uniformed ‘responders’ arrive, I’ll have ‘thrown’ only as many 230 grain HPs as necessary to ensure all they need do is draw the chalk lines around the bodies of the ‘gremlins’ and wait for the coroner. Col. Grossman called us ‘sheepdogs’ – we do NOT ‘run and hide’.

  • The Brigadier

    Homeland Security cannot dictate to a civilian under fire how to protect him or herself. If someone is shooting at me and misses, I am going to blow his fricking head off. Its time that DHS is abolished for not only being tyrannical, but also incredibly stupid.