Multiple Michigan Swatting Events Today

You mean like in Texas where the school was surrounded by cops an no one went in, not even the swat team? How much time did they give that young man? He had all the time in the world. Some parents snack in and got their kids out, rightfully so, as law enforcement was not there to serve and protect it seamed, all 376 of them. Yup, 376 officers where there, pretty much a small army and all they did was prevent help.

Wasn’t there a Supreme Court ruling that cops have absolutely no obligation to protect citizens 🤔


https://www.texastribune.org/2022/07/17/law-enforcement-failure-uvalde-shooting-investigation/
That is universally seen as a HUGE failure as far as the police response.
 
That is universally seen as a HUGE failure as far as the police response.
Agreed. Even most LEO agencies see it as a failure on many levels.

We've had a few reported active-shooter events in my former jurisdiction.
- school event was no shots fired, but there was a student on campus with a firearm
- worship event ended up being bladed weapons, but not guns; many attacked and hurt but none died
- mall shooting was real; people died
I participated in the first two of the three. I believe we did an outstanding job. Quick response; reasonably coordinated efforts; short duration. Not all agencies stand around with their thumbs up their posteriors. Most act immediately out of a sense of duty; compelled not by law, but by conscience.
 
Last edited:
6 days after my original post: literally a stone's throw from the incident I described at this thread's start, there are now 3 dead people and 5 injured in hospital from the Michigan State University active shooter event. I was listening to my scanner as they approached the alleged shooter a few miles away and he shot himself - dead.

This hits home personally. Unbelievable. Beyond comprehension. I locked our doors with my shotgun beside me.

 
Last edited:
  • Sad
Reactions: GON
I can speak with some experience to some of these questions.

First - LEOs are no different, nor are their agencies, from the overall general public; we are all a bit different from each other. Different jurisdictions are reflections of their different locales, in nearly every aspect. Therefore, my answers are not 100% attributable to all agencies; my comments are generalizations and there will always be some example that does not fit my answers. That said, I'll continue:

- Training and responses: most all agencies have active shooter training now days. Typically combined with other agencies in the general area. Training is practice, and "practice makes perfect". Obviously, no one person and no one agency is perfect! There are examples of failures (such as the recent one in TX), and there are also examples of success. Each agency will have their own protocols and SOPs; most will be similar across the spectrum, but probably never identical.

- Dispatching: the job these folks have is very different, but can be just as stressful, as LEOs in the field. They, too, get training nowdays for all manner of calls; domestic violence, missing persons, active shooter, natural disaster, etc. The "investigation" they do is based on getting particulars about the call, but they do not discern the nature of the call (real or fake). Dispatchers collect and disseminate info; they do not investigate the nature of sincerity or credibility; that's not their job. Typically, calls of this nature (active shooter) are going to involve not just the LEOs, but also fire and medical responses, initiating lockdown protocols, informing high-level agency management, etc. They don't have time to discern the truthfulness of call; they are the first aspect of the overall response - it's their job to kick all the legs of response into action, not just the cops.

- Location personnel: They also may get training, depending upon local policy. The quality of event response vary widely not only because of policy, but also personnel. Think about any typical school ... there's always "new" personel somewhere; a teacher or two, an office person, a janitor, even substitute teachers and temp hires for kitchen staff, etc. Just because the school has a written policy, it is HIGHLY likely that some of these "new" folks don't know the protocol because they never participated in the training. Typically, even if the school district does have active shooter training, it only happens once a year. If you were hired after that, or were sick that day, or are a substitute teacher, you probably didn't get that training.


I recall, early in my career, we had an active bank alarm call. (NOTE - it was an accidental alarm; no actual robbery). I was the first to respond; I was very close when the call came out. Our department had training in how all the local banks were to respond; there were code phrases and words to be used, protocol to be followed on scene, etc. When I arrived, I asked dispatch to call the bank back, give the pass code phrase, and get the word response; they called and the bank answered with the wrong response. Because it was a false alarm, they were supposed to give a particular phone code, and then walk outside with a colored 12" x 12" card in hand held above the head. None of that happened, so when the bank person walked outside the door, I had to cuff that person and gave the on-scene call that things were not OK. (despite the fact that everything was truly OK, they weren't OK in terms of protocol). So my fellow officers came screaming up in their cars, rifles were out everywhere, customers were panicing, and it was a mess. In debriefing, it was agreed that it was the bank's fault and not mine; new bank employees didn't know the process, and being a Saturday, it was a skeleton crew in the bank. It could have ended much worse than us pushing people down on the ground and cuffing them all.

All it takes is a single failure in the response system and the whole thing begins to break down. Be it the responders or the victims, they are affected by these general failures:
- lack of policy
- poor policy
- lack of training
- poor training
- lack of response
- poor response
These all even have many aspects within each element.

My point? There is only 1 way any emergency response goes right, and about 100 ways it can go wrong. It's super easy to play Monday-morning quarterback. Some response failures are easy to identify, some are not. Some failures will never be completely purged, because human beings are not always predictable or accountable. We can always TRY to be perfect, but it's not reasonable to think we will be.


**************

As to the responsibility of LEOs (or really, the "system" as a whole) ...
SCOTUS has not once, but twice clearly determined that agencies have no particular duty to protect any one individual.
See the following:

- Warren vs District of Columbia
- Gonzales vs Castle Rock, CO

It comes down to this concept ... There is nothing in the Constitution that ascribes any manner of "safety" being assured to a person. There are concepts of Life, Libery and Pursuit of Happiness, but not one mention that your "safety" is going to be a gauranteed condition in the US. Despite common belief to the contrary, it's not the goverment's role to protect an individual. Regardless of what many people think, cops do not have a duty to protect you from life's events. They can attempt to do so, but they are not obligated to do so, so any perceived or real failure to protect is a matter of bad luck and not reasonable expectation. Communities who want their safety "assured" are going to be disappointed. Communities can certainly do things to provide for "better" levels of protection; stacking the odds in their favor by having more emergency services, better funding, better training, etc. But that in no way obligates goverment at any level to gaurantee your safety. The only time a goverment entity has a duty to your safety is when you are in custody; because once in custody, you cannot reasonably protect yourself as you are limited/restricted in your ability to care for yourself or make decisions. Once in custody, the goverment does have some obligations. But not for the general public; there is no duty to protect. So says SCOTUS.
You raise and excellent point and one that bothers me. Whenever I see the aftermath of a school shooting, I see a ton of cops with AR15s and all the kids with their hands over their heads being marched outside. Every time the shooter was already neutralized. It seems a huge risk having all those riles out and kids scared when the all clear is given and the risk is over. With all those scared kids and hyped up cops there is a risk for someone to do something stupid. I guess that's my question. How do the police or school verify the all clear and de-escalate?
 
You raise and excellent point and one that bothers me. Whenever I see the aftermath of a school shooting, I see a ton of cops with AR15s and all the kids with their hands over their heads being marched outside. Every time the shooter was already neutralized. It seems a huge risk having all those riles out and kids scared when the all clear is given and the risk is over. With all those scared kids and hyped up cops there is a risk for someone to do something stupid. I guess that's my question. How do the police or school verify the all clear and de-escalate?
It's a fair question.

The answer lays in the fact that, while LEOs can believe the all-clear is truly "all clear", the concept of fault-to-the-side of caution prevails. There are times where LEOs do not know with absolute certainty that the "all clear" is verified. It can be presumed, but often not assured until a full, detailed sweep of the premisis is done, which can take hours.

- how many shooters are there? (panic stricken 911 reports via cell and land line calls often conflate the issues; no one is "sure" and accounts can vary widely. You'd be amazed how badly reports can conflict with each other in real time.) Controlling the outflow of people from the scene helps manage the hysteria. It cannot control the chaos, but it can help funnel it into manageable pieces.

- how many exits were or were not covered? (we don't want the bad guy getting away; also, we try to direct the escaping victims into streams were triage and first-aid can be assessed and given if needed)

- while it is common for the active shooter(s) to take their own lives, the wolves have tried to sneak out with the sheep, and actually have suceeded in a few cases. LEOs are struggling to visually search all the people pouring out of the building; it's a lot to take in all at once.

Also, most LEOs today wear body cameras (not all, but it's ever increasing), and so as those people parade past officers, there's a audio/video record of who came out and when. While it can't be reviewed for accuracy immediately, it's very helpful in post-event fact finding and counting heads, etc.

My point is that one can assume the shooter is "neutralized", but that's not always the case. And in the sense of being safer than sorry, all people are sent out with hands up into contained areas, or at least funneled past control points. The kids are not coming out when the "all clear" is given; that often happens hours after a full and comprehensive building search is done and many key witnesses have been interviewed. The people are coming out ASAP to increase their safety and reduce the elements inside the active search zone(s).

It's very hard to control these kinds of incidents as they happen. In fact, I'm not really sure "control" is the operative word. It's a matter of trying to reduce further injury and contain/eliminate the threat.

This is pretty much how my training at my agency went:
- the first officer(s) responds immediately to the threat; the first one(s) on scene is/are in charge until seniority staff arrives
* if the threat is ongoing and shots are being fired, you run towards the sounds of shots and screaming
* if the threat is not located, but also not actively shooting (making locating the shooter(s) difficult), you start sweeping your route and do your best to ask quick questions of the people inside, such as "which direction did the shots come from?" and "do you have any idea what the shooter was wearing?
* the first LEO(s) on scene are trying to manage a lot of incoming intel, coordinate with dispatch, AND find the shooter, ALL AT THE SAME TIME. It is incredily easy to arm-chair QB this after the fact, but in real time, it's a complete and total goat rodeo.

- as more LEOs arrive, you start a grid search that makes the most sense of the building characteristics
* it may be by directional or vertical (zig zag pattern? floor by floor? etc)

- as yet more resources arrive, you set up triage zones and stage medical personnel
* if the threat has been located, you can coordinate the response to concentrate there if the threat is still viable
* if the threat has not been located, you use more and more resources and split the responding units into zones as determined by the command staff which hopefully has showed up by this time

I think the most terrifying thing would be to assume the situation is "all clear" only to find out that a secondary shooter is still present in a coordinated attack, or that there are explosive secondary elements present. The "all clear" can take several hours to come AFTER the event starts.

Most simply stated, but in no way simply achieved, you try to do these simultaneously:
- stop the threat
- get the people to safety
- contain/arrest the threat if still alive
Then you try to do these things:
- assure no secondary threats are present
- get medical assistance to those who need it (some are ambulatory and can get out; others are wounded inside and need help in place)
- preserve any critical evidence

In a school there may be some reasonable guess as to how many people were present that day (class attendance records). But there's no such thing in a mall or open public place; which makes accounting for all potential victims even more difficult.

The "all clear" comes after those things above are reasonably assured.

Hope that sheds some light into the thoughts at the scene.

Also realize that each LEO entity will prioritize all these above into the nuances which best fit their challenges and strengths, their resources, their training partners, the physical constraints at the scene, and so on ...
 
You raise and excellent point and one that bothers me. Whenever I see the aftermath of a school shooting, I see a ton of cops with AR15s and all the kids with their hands over their heads being marched outside. Every time the shooter was already neutralized. It seems a huge risk having all those riles out and kids scared when the all clear is given and the risk is over. With all those scared kids and hyped up cops there is a risk for someone to do something stupid. I guess that's my question. How do the police or school verify the all clear and de-escalate?
Rifles are inanimate objects. They are not a problem.
 
It's a fair question.

The answer lays in the fact that, while LEOs can believe the all-clear is truly "all clear", the concept of fault-to-the-side of caution prevails. There are times where LEOs do not know with absolute certainty that the "all clear" is verified. It can be presumed, but often not assured until a full, detailed sweep of the premisis is done, which can take hours.

- how many shooters are there? (panic stricken 911 reports via cell and land line calls often conflate the issues; no one is "sure" and accounts can vary widely. You'd be amazed how badly reports can conflict with each other in real time.) Controlling the outflow of people from the scene helps manage the hysteria. It cannot control the chaos, but it can help funnel it into manageable pieces.

- how many exits were or were not covered? (we don't want the bad guy getting away; also, we try to direct the escaping victims into streams were triage and first-aid can be assessed and given if needed)

- while it is common for the active shooter(s) to take their own lives, the wolves have tried to sneak out with the sheep, and actually have suceeded in a few cases. LEOs are struggling to visually search all the people pouring out of the building; it's a lot to take in all at once.

Also, most LEOs today wear body cameras (not all, but it's ever increasing), and so as those people parade past officers, there's a audio/video record of who came out and when. While it can't be reviewed for accuracy immediately, it's very helpful in post-event fact finding and counting heads, etc.

My point is that one can assume the shooter is "neutralized", but that's not always the case. And in the sense of being safer than sorry, all people are sent out with hands up into contained areas, or at least funneled past control points. The kids are not coming out when the "all clear" is given; that often happens hours after a full and comprehensive building search is done and many key witnesses have been interviewed. The people are coming out ASAP to increase their safety and reduce the elements inside the active search zone(s).

It's very hard to control these kinds of incidents as they happen. In fact, I'm not really sure "control" is the operative word. It's a matter of trying to reduce further injury and contain/eliminate the threat.

This is pretty much how my training at my agency went:
- the first officer(s) responds immediately to the threat; the first one(s) on scene is/are in charge until seniority staff arrives
* if the threat is ongoing and shots are being fired, you run towards the sounds of shots and screaming
* if the threat is not located, but also not actively shooting (making locating the shooter(s) difficult), you start sweeping your route and do your best to ask quick questions of the people inside, such as "which direction did the shots come from?" and "do you have any idea what the shooter was wearing?
* the first LEO(s) on scene are trying to manage a lot of incoming intel, coordinate with dispatch, AND find the shooter, ALL AT THE SAME TIME. It is incredily easy to arm-chair QB this after the fact, but in real time, it's a complete and total goat rodeo.

- as more LEOs arrive, you start a grid search that makes the most sense of the building characteristics
* it may be by directional or vertical (zig zag pattern? floor by floor? etc)

- as yet more resources arrive, you set up triage zones and stage medical personnel
* if the threat has been located, you can coordinate the response to concentrate there if the threat is still viable
* if the threat has not been located, you use more and more resources and split the responding units into zones as determined by the command staff which hopefully has showed up by this time

I think the most terrifying thing would be to assume the situation is "all clear" only to find out that a secondary shooter is still present in a coordinated attack, or that there are explosive secondary elements present. The "all clear" can take several hours to come AFTER the event starts.

Most simply stated, but in no way simply achieved, you try to do these simultaneously:
- stop the threat
- get the people to safety
- contain/arrest the threat if still alive
Then you try to do these things:
- assure no secondary threats are present
- get medical assistance to those who need it (some are ambulatory and can get out; others are wounded inside and need help in place)
- preserve any critical evidence

In a school there may be some reasonable guess as to how many people were present that day (class attendance records). But there's no such thing in a mall or open public place; which makes accounting for all potential victims even more difficult.

The "all clear" comes after those things above are reasonably assured.

Hope that sheds some light into the thoughts at the scene.

Also realize that each LEO entity will prioritize all these above into the nuances which best fit their challenges and strengths, their resources, their training partners, the physical constraints at the scene, and so on ...
Thanks for the explanation. I think we're all in agreement that
It's a matter of trying to reduce further injury and contain/eliminate the threat.
If current thinking is doing what is described above is the best way to achieve that then that is the best thing to do.

I don't have access to this article but the introduction captures my sentiment better than I could write.
 
I graduated in 2001. I remember Columbine on TV. What is going on with today's youth? I never had any worries in High School.
And surely you had “bomb scares”… I remember those - difference being back then there were payohones that were probably not monitored.
 
One of the VERY big challenges for LEO's in this MSU situation was the detrimental effects of social media and the HUGE number of "tips" called in to 911 during the active event. Tens of thousands of people were tuned in to the police scanner via phone apps.. 100's of tips were called in to 911based on rumors exaggerated on social media. The LEO's had to evaluate every single tip called in. In one instance, the police scanner was abuzz with the false tip that shooting continued in a third location. Ironically, the suspect was found about 4 miles away (walked) because a observant citizen called in a tip of someone matching the suspect's description.
 
I really stopped trusting our authorities and news telling us the truth about much anything. Look at how much they made of Jan...........

Point is, sometimes you just don't know unless you are/were there. In person.
 
You raise and excellent point and one that bothers me. Whenever I see the aftermath of a school shooting, I see a ton of cops with AR15s and all the kids with their hands over their heads being marched outside. Every time the shooter was already neutralized. It seems a huge risk having all those riles out and kids scared when the all clear is given and the risk is over. With all those scared kids and hyped up cops there is a risk for someone to do something stupid. I guess that's my question. How do the police or school verify the all clear and de-escalate?

It’s a slow, but sure way of converting our youth from free thinking individuals into obeying and not questioning robotons.

Remember it’s all for your safety. Even if they point a rifle at your head, it’s for your own safety. You drill this into a young mind and it will be hard to get out.
Not blaming the police here, they are just tools the hands of others. “Just doing my job” right?
 
Remember it’s all for your safety. Even if they point a rifle at your head, it’s for your own safety. You drill this into a young mind and it will be hard to get out.
Not blaming the police here, they are just tools the hands of others. “Just doing my job” right?

In a catastrophic event such as those we discuss here, EVERYONE'S safety is paramount. The victims and the First Responders all have a desire to survive. Even the shooters have a right to life, if they were to surrender.

A little bit of a tactial clarification here. I've not seen any images of LEOs with firearms pointed directly at the head of every single person exiting a building. There's a concept called "low ready", where the LEOs firearm is deployed in a quick-ready state, but not directly sight-aimed. I've seen that "low ready" stace frequently in these situations, and I do believe it's the appropriate position to take. Leaving your Glock in your holster or your AR in your trunk at an active shooter event is being unprepared. Being "ready" is proper response. If a threat escalates, you then raise your line-of-sight aim and decide if shots are warranted.

But this is a matter of control first and feelings second. Is it scary to have a weapon pointed at you? Absolutely it is. But given the alternative, that of evil doing continued violence by masquerading as an innocent victim past the control points, I must say that deferring to "safe rather than sorry" means some people are going to get their feelings hurt. So be it.

I think what many people don't get is just how incredibly chaotic and spastic these events can be. It is nothing but total confusion. As I said, I've been directly involved in responses to two of these type events. News Flash: There is no perfect response to these events. You can and should strive to be and do the very best you can as a responder, but there's always a caveat waiting around the corner; something you didn't see or know about that would change your perspective. You go with what you know at the split-second in time and the rest comes out in the wash. Practicing active shooter events with multiple agencies is a great way to improve the responses; it hones the coordination between elements and also makes for quicker response times. But in the end, it is really all about reactions; there's nothing proactive about these types of events as they happen in real life. The "proactive" part is training. But when these events occur; it's all reactive. You're reacting to many inputs (perhaps hundreds of them) which come flying into the situation all at the same time. If LEOs point a gun at someone at one of these events, it's not because they are getting off on a power trip; they're trying to make sure that the violence which did happen, doesn't continue to happen.

Cops have ZERO idea of who the bad guys are with certainty as the event is unfolding. For all we know, there could be an element of multiple bad actors and one or more is trying to slip out with the innocents. So everyone is a suspect as the event unfolds. That's because the alternative choice would be irresponsible; that of letting a "victim" (perpetrator) sneak past you just to engage in violence past the control point.

There are concepts and detailed response techniques I'll not discuss here; things we LEOs discuss in private that we don't divulge to the public. This is because we don't want to encourage or advise bad actors to understand how we prepare and deal with these events. Some things may seem hap-hazard but are calculated based upon considerations not seen by the public, and/or as a precursor to reducing the potential of other more heinous concerns.
 
It’s your training and protocols, I get it. But dismissing the psychological impact on the KIDS as “some people’s feelings being hurt” shows that your training is the way of looking at this from a broader perspective. The end justifies the means. Pure tactical training, nothing more.

That’s how you remove humanity from the enforcers. It has been done numerous times in the past. Don’t want to mention specifics, but I’m sure which past I’m talking about 1939-1945.
 
Swatting- the caller had hit HUNDREDS of schools all around this nation for months. He/she did it for months. He hid behind a VPN with 256 bit encryption. There was NO way to track the suspect and catch them, unless they made a mistake. Not the CIA, the FBI, the DIA or any other three letter agency could crack that 256 bit encryption. I believe I heard that a suspect had been finally caught after making a mistake , and thus, the calls nationwide have finally died down or come to a stop (mostly).

As to guy in this thread pooping on the cops, and just offering ill informed opinions about stuff you don’t understand… cool. The AR15 is the best tool in the arsenal to combat an active shooter. If your local cops are responding to an active shooter and don’t have an AR15 in their hands, well that sucks. The guns are safe at the low ready position. The safety is kept on safe. They will never fire until the officer flips the safety off and then presses the trigger. I could care less about appearances. Give the officers the best tool for the job.

I’m prior LEO and actually work in school security now. Banning guns and limiting the carrying of weapons to police officers only in schools was a drastic mistake. There isn’t enough of them. Plus as Parkland and Texas showed us, cops can make mistakes and not respond appropriately. Every school should have an armed officer , as well as several armed coaches, guidance counselors, teachers, janitors, security officers…. whomever. If they have the skill, ability, and willingness to protect children , then the red tape needs cut and they should be allowed to do so.

Best practice nowadays is an armed officer on every campus, with a readily available rifle, carried on their person. I’d like to see that expanded to include any staff member that wants to carry.

Kids having hurt feelings over the (gasp) sight of an armed officer carrying an AR15 rifle?! Dude? Are you serious. I’m pretty sure they would rather see armed officers than a bunch of bloody bodies in the hallways.
 
Please describe in detail all of the “tyrannical behavior masquerading as safety” you have seen. I’ll wait.
 
I graduated in 2001. I remember Columbine on TV. What is going on with today's youth? I never had any worries in High School.
These kids didn’t know discipline, corrective actions, or just plain getting their ***es beat when they were kids and lost their tempers. They’re also used to getting participation trophies for everything, so when presented with rejection or failure, they lose their dam minds and take their anger out on innocents.

We need to bring back mental hospitals and properly help people with antisocial behaviors like this. It’s obvious that the “love and accept everyone regardless of their psychosis” is getting people hurt and killed!
 
Please describe in detail all of the “tyrannical behavior masquerading as safety” you have seen. I’ll wait.
I know you didn't ask me, but there are at least 4 nasty bills, maybe more in WA state house/senate aimed right at all legal citizens in a very controlling manner and all of them are masquerading as "safety" and not one of them will help with crime and will simply turn otherwise law abiding citizens into criminals
 
Back
Top