Weather
Theater Shooting Has Anchorage Considering OptionsQuestions regarding safety bring suggestionsRelated Content
ANCHORAGE - It’s a terrifying prospect: You are in a public place and the shooting begins. People in a Denver area movie theater lived that nightmare last week. Now people are questioning their safety in public places as well as wondering if that same scenario might have played out differently here in Anchorage. There’s no doubt every minute of the assault was terrifying but police say the type of attack that happened in the Colorado theater almost always begins and ends fairly quickly. “Most active attacks are over in 20 minutes,” says Anchorage Chief Mark Mew. “That’s how long they take on the average. One way or another they are settled in 20 minutes.” That information has led to a change in how local police respond to situations where there is an active and ongoing attack. Instead, patrol officers who are often first on scene, have been taught how to respond. “If you have an active attack where people are being actively shot or killed,” said Mew, “you are probably not going to wait for SWAT. We are going to go in and try and engage the threat and stop it.” But when it comes to a medical response, Anchorage may be at a disadvantage. An event with mass casualties means local hospitals might be overwhelmed. With only eight ambulances to transport patients Assistant Fire Chief Erich Scheunemann says we could come up short and need to borrow resources. “We can request ambulances from on base as well as we have two volunteer departments Chugiak and down in Girdwood that if they have the staffing they can bring in ambulances from there.” Police say one thing that may have changed the outcome if the shooting had happened here: the number of people who carry legally concealed weapons. It’s possibly someone may have been able to take the shooter out before they managed to kill so many people. |
This content requires the latest Adobe Flash Player and a browser with JavaScript enabled.
Click here for a free download of the latest Adobe Flash Player.
|
You have indicated this comment should be removed.
The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .
TedtheBear said on Tuesday, Jul 24 at 8:59 PM
Well Robin, that is easier said then done. Us Americans do get with the program but just remembered that even during the American Revolution, we could not defeat the British until we got rid of the "militia mentality" and became regular soldiers that can stand toe to toe against the British regulars.
97436586Robin Scheff said on Tuesday, Jul 24 at 7:45 AM
Well, the guy was in full body armour so whoever was shooting back, and I guarantee if I was there and armed I would have been shooting back, it might have been tricky to bring him down, even if you were a trained person in these types of situations. Oh, and as for 'armed civilians' being deemed next to useless in combat, perhaps, but us Americans get with the program pretty quickly. If this country were actualy attacked, we civilians might be fuzzy at first, but we love our freedom and we would all fight, just like the Europeans did to defend their homeland. In a high panic situation like the one in the theater in Colorado, trained calm minds and steady hands are a better solution, of course.
97357992TedtheBear said on Tuesday, Jul 24 at 6:59 AM
James Holmes used gas to help create the chaos and confusion that aided in his attack. He knows that anyone out there is his target so he can shoot without fear. Anyone shooting back will only aid Holmes and his body count because that person only have one target to hit out of hundreds of panicking people. If Holmes murdered 12 and 12 more are killed by "friendly fire", then some guy like Mr. Jayjack will be sharing a same cell with Mr. Holmes.
97353186cooljulie said on Tuesday, Jul 24 at 5:53 AM
Well said Jayjack!
97346061David said on Tuesday, Jul 24 at 3:33 AM
TedtheBear, I respect you opinion; however, I disagree with it. A lot of veterans carry especially prior NCO's or Officers, If your in the kill zone what is the sop if fired upon (attack). If a concealed carry would have been close enough I believe things could have turned out different.
97334076gi joe said on Tuesday, Jul 24 at 12:24 AM
most studies done by the military are flawed.
97326656jayjack said on Monday, Jul 23 at 11:19 PM
I would shoot and take full responsibility for any bullets matching my weapon. Better to be under investigation as a second shooter than dead as a victim. Shoot the mass murderer and let the judicial system sort it out.
97324736wowcow said on Monday, Jul 23 at 9:04 PM
I don't think I would have drawn my weapon under the circumstances described in Aurora: dark, OC gas, and panicked people running helter skelter. And once a weapon is drawn, I become the "second" shooter to first responders. I would shoot back if I was being targeted, but I don't think I would to save an unarmed civilian.
97320126TedtheBear said on Monday, Jul 23 at 8:41 PM
Study in combat often show that men under fire usually keep under cover. That is why there are officers and NCOs to kick these men into returning fire. Most civilians under fire will stayed under cover. History has shown that armed civilians are next to useless in combat.
97319116cooljulie said on Monday, Jul 23 at 7:37 PM
I would't be found at a batman movie, but I always carry when I'm in Los Anchorage! Be more than happy to do my part if ever it's needed.
97312896Add a comment
Most Popular