Response of the New York City Police Department during an Active Shooter incident at Penn Station - Research Paper Example

 The effective response of the New York City Police Department during an Active Shooter incident at Penn Station during rush hour Introduction Crime is a vice that most governments are trying all over the world to eradicate. In most countries police officers have been trying to come up with strategies that can either prevent or lower the chances of crimes taking place. At times some of the strategies put in place by the law enforcers have assisted in reducing the level of crimes or totally eliminating some crimes. There are incidents where the strategies used by the police to prevent certain crimes have not worked. For a very longtime now various incidences of indiscriminate shooting of people in the United States have been reported. The question that a lot of people ask after such shooting incidences is why such crimes are becoming so prevalent (Green, 2013). The indiscriminate shootings has resulted in the death of hundreds of people mostly civilians who are not armed. Even though the motives behind some of the shootings have been identified and some have remained unsolved. Literature review On the 7th of December 1993, at least five people lost their lives and scores injured after a man opened fire in a train. According to reports from some of the leading media stations and the police, a man who was onboard a packed Long Island Rail Road train during the rush hour time opened fire and in the process killed about five people. The shooting is alleged to have taken place as the train was about to stop at the Merillon Avenue station, some few minutes to six in the evening. A man is alleged to have entered into the train’s third carriage and started shooting at the passengers while walking backwards down the aisle. According to the statements of some of the passengers who were in the carriage, the man took out a 9-millimeter handgun, looked at the passengers before shooting them one after the other. After running out of bullets, the man reloaded his gun and continued shooting without uttering a single word to any of his victims. According to the Nassau police chief, Mel Kenny, it was not immediately established why the man who had boarded the train at the Penn station decided to shoot fellow passengers. The man had sat quietly in the train for about thirty minutes before carrying out the attacks just as the train was about to stop at the Merillon Avenue station. Two minutes later after the train passenger shoot out, the train reached the Merillon station but the doors could not open immediately to let the passengers rush out of the train. The man was finally arrested after a shooting ordeal that lasted for about two minutes. According to most of the professionals who have handed incidents of active shooter incidents, the shooter usually attack the most vulnerable people and places. In almost all shooting incidents, it was established that the shooters inflicted high level of damage before being confronted by any armed resistance. Thus swift reaction by an armed police officer whether alone or not may be very vital in reducing the number of casualties (Roberts, 2013). In the course of active shooters incidence, the police officers had to follow a given procedure or approach. Below are is the procedure followed during the incidence; Reporting The police were alerted on the incidence through the phone by a passenger who managed to call 911. The dispatcher then informed the relevant units and all the police officers close to the scene heard about what is happening and what to expect. Due to the nature of the shooting, the dispatcher informed SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics). The first officers to arrive at the scene were four officers who were on patrol next to the railway station. The officers split into two groups, one group evacuated the injured while the second group secured the area cordoning it off to avoid more casualties. Evacuation During the shooting, very many people sustained bullet injuries in various parts of the body. Some passengers were able to run away from the scene with scratches and the police directed them into the waiting ambulances. Accessing the injured victims who could not walk was not easy for the paramedics so the police had to step in and move the crowd that was gathering back. There were cases that required special attention. One of these cases was that of a pregnant woman who seven months pregnant was. The police had to put her on their chopper. Back up Due to the limitation in the number of police officers, one of the officers called for backup which he was told was in the way. The first batch of the backup team to arrive at the scene was the New York SWAT Team. Having been briefed on the situation and what to expect, the team came to the scene and swiftly took strategic positions (Morrissey, 2011). In order to ensure that no officer would become a victim they went into the train in groups of four famously known as the “Quad.” Officer vs. Shooter scenario In any active shooter scenario, the chances of fire exchange cannot be avoided (Duncan, 2008). All police officers have been trained to deal with any situation involving shooting, thus have an advantage over the shooters who most of the times are not trained in combat. In this case, the officers managed to enter into the train without firing any bullets. As a precaution, the police threw teargas canisters in the train. Friendly fire There have been instances where some police shoot their fellow officers by mistake. This has been rampant in instances where the police officers have gained entry to an active shooters scene at different intervals. Police officers have been trained to handle their guns appropriately; each police officer is responsible for each and every bullet that comes out of his gun. In that aspect before firing any bullet an officer should be sure if the person they are firing at is the shooter. In order to eliminate any chances of the officers shooting one another accidently, the officers went into the train wearing similar uniform. Making of arrests In a crime, making an arrest is essential as it helps the investigators to find out the actual motive behind a crime. The New York police have a very efficient investigations department. It comprises of the scene of crimes experts such as the ballistic experts and other investigation officers. In that aspect the police always strives to bring suspects into custody to help in carrying out investigations (Fassinger, 2011). Having been wrestled to the ground by some passengers, the police had a very easy time in arresting the culprit. Disabling the shooter Having shot people for about two minutes and without facing any resistance, action had to be taken to ensure that no more lives were lost. Unknown to a majority of people including the police officers who responded, an off duty policeman had already rushed into the train and with the aid of two other passengers took the gun away from the shooter. Investigation In order to ascertain the motive behind the shooting, the suspect was taken into custody. The investigation officers took the culprits details, and counter checked against the crime records to find out if the man had any criminal records. Examination of the train by the investigation team started immediately before the bodies of the dead were moved away from the scene. Having ascertained the identity of the suspect, he was charged promptly and was scheduled to appear in court. He was charged for being in possession of unlicensed firearm, causing malicious damage and murder. Moving the dead The shooting resulted in the death of five people, fortunately they had identification documents. The police then came up with a list of the dead and put up an information centre where members of the public who had relatives on board could go and inquire about the whereabouts f their loved ones. The dead bodies were then moved to the morgue. Aim of the research The main aim of the research is to ascertain whether the New York Police responded appropriately to the Penn station shooting (Curry & Hastlings, 2001). The research will also give the findings and recommendations of what should have been done to prevent the incident from taking place. The research will give recommendations on what should be done to prevent a similar incident from taking place in the future. Research methodology and design In order to carry out the research and come up with a report that is not biased, the researcher had to use appropriate methods of data collection. Being that the incident had taken place very many years ago; the best source of information was police and media reports (Kirkland, 2012). The researcher had to ascertain that the information from the websites were authentic. The researcher had to interview some police officers so as to know more about what the training they undergo entails. This was vital as it would enable the researcher to get answers to some questions that could not be found on the internet. The interview also enabled the researcher to make clarifications on some issues that were not clear. Research question 1. What does police training entail 2. What do you think is the best approach to an active shooter incident 3. What are some of the challenges you may face in an active shooter scenario. 4. Do you think you have to put your life on the line to save civilians Research limitation Getting the facts related to the incident was not easy as the researcher had to look for the information from the internet. Some of the information was scanty and could not provide the needed information related to the shooting incident. Accessing some of the websites, especially by the police, was not easy. Police officers cannot grant interviews without the prior notice of their superiors thus the researcher had to approach some police chiefs in order for the officers to grant the interviews. The research questions had to be vetted first before the officers agreed to the interview. Some police officers did not respond to some questions. Some police officers interviewed were not cooperative and simply answered yes or no to some of the questions. Analysis of the Data/Findings The police have the responsibility of enforcing the law. In incidents where there are people using guns to kill others, the police have to act swiftly and appropriately to prevent any further loss of life and destruction of property (Smith, 2013). However approaching a shooter active scene requires some cautious approach. At times it is a matter of sacrifice on the part of the police who have to respond. The various incidents of shooting have been a major concern to the law enforcement forces as well as the public. With that in mind various people especially the security enforcement professionals have tried to do some research on the best way the police should respond to an active shooters scene (Dorfsman, 2014). According a police chief by the name of J.D. Lightfoot who has carried out research based on various incidents, “once the shooters were confronted by an armed response, no other innocents were killed.” Sacrifice According to Lightfoot, since his agency started training officers on the best way to approach an active shooter, the most common question that the participating officers ask is “in an active shooter incident, are losses of police officers acceptable?” Thus many police officers feel that approaching an active shooter scene alone is like sacrificing oneself. In Lightfoot’s opinion a single officer responding to an active shooter scene has an upper hand. Lightfoot gives various scenarios where the response by a single officer helped to stop shooters from killing more people. The Carthage nursing home shooting as well as the Salt Lake City Square Mall shooting are good examples of how the reaction by a single police officer can end a shooters siege. At times an active shooter scenario may call for some very tough decision-making that may involve life threatening choices. One of the police officers interviewed told the researcher “I also have a family to take care of; if something happens to me my family will suffer.” He continued “most of the time the public expects us to put our lives on the line to save theirs.” Some police officers intimated that even though the core objective of a police is to protect the lives of the people, it does not mean that they should lose their lives. From a research carried out on the various shooting incidents, it was established that most of the shooters managed to kill an average of eight people. It was further established that in the shooting incidents two people were killed every minute. In the Penn station incident the shooter managed to kill about five people in a span of about two minutes. With such shocking statistics it is evident that the more time security personnel take to respond to an active shooter scene the higher the casualties. Back up According to Lightfoot’s opinion, the four man police response is unproductive. The number of shooting incidences that have been stopped by four or more officers is very limited. Most of the cases have been stopped by swift reaction of single policemen Most officers at times wait for back up to arrive before engaging an active shooter which may lead to high number of casualties. In an active shooter incident engaging the shooter will help take the attention off the mostly unarmed civilians (Baldanza, 2005). Thus a single police officer can engage a shooter while waiting for back up to arrive. According to shooter active scenario experts “During an active shooter incident, you are dealing with a very brutal equation: Time taken by first responders’ equals’ casualties.” The faster the security personnel respond to such an incident the lower the number of casualties. Police officers are better trained to handle such situations than the ordinary citizens. In that aspect even a single armed officer has a high chance of taking down an active shooter just like four police are capable of doing. The Penn shooting incident lasted only about two minutes as a result of a fast response by some passengers and the first police who rushed to the scene. In all major cases of shooting that has taken place in the United States of America, and has recorded low numbers of casualties has been as a result of the fast reaction of mostly off duty police (Morrissey, 2012). If the police men in these instances would have waited for back up to arrive before reacting, then a high number of people would have been casualties. In the Penn train station shooting incident, the shooter managed to kill about five people as the response by the security personnel was fast. The number of casualties can be attributed to the fact that the train was packed at the time. When the train came to a stop the shooter was subdued very fast thus preventing loss of more life. The police managed to contact the medical teams that eventually managed to take the injured to hospital. Findings Police officers have the responsibility of ensuring that the lives of the innocent are not lost. At times the responsibility of ensuring that law and order prevails, the police at times have to put their lives at risk (Jr, 2007). According to the numerous answers that I got from the police that I interviewed, most feel that most of the time they have to risk their lives. Some of the officers feel that the public expects a lot from them when faced with imminent danger. In the Penn station shooting incident the first security officer responded out of instinct. Armed with a gun and without any body armor the lone police responded in the most appropriate way. The backup also got to the incident in time thus securing the area. When the public is running away from imminent danger, the police are expected to run towards the danger. An active shooter incidence is a scene that most people run away from. The police man who rushed into the train to confront the shooter did so well aware that being shot was possible. Even though some police officers are not contended with the fact that at times they have to risk their lives in order to save the lives of civilians. The New York police officers have been trained adequately to respond to an active shooter scene. They have all the necessary machinery and personnel to ensure that they respond swiftly to prevent any loss of life. The New York police responded to the Penn station shooting incident in the most appropriate way. Each and every department of the police did the job that it was supposed to perform. The New York police department is well equipped to handle cases of active shooters. Summary The police have been given the responsibility of ensuring that all the citizens abide by the laid down laws. At times making sure that the citizens abide by the law may require officers to make risky decisions. The Penn station attack was a very unfortunate incidence, but the security personnel responded appropriately. The police made it possible for the medical teams to attend to the injured by ensuring that the members of the public stayed away making it easy for the medical teams to carry out their duties. The security personnel could have been at fault for not preventing the incident but they reacted appropriately. The public should also be made aware that the issues of security can only be overcomed through cooperation. This can be ascertained from the attack at the Penn station where a member of the public wrested the armed man to the ground. Conclusion The New York police department reacted swiftly and appropriately to the Penn Station attacks. Depending on the circumstances, the attacks took place and the police reacted fast. The first respondents at the scene performed all the procedures that was expected of them. The shooter was first subdued and taken away by the police; the second step was taking of the injured to the hospital. In such a situation the main goal is to prevent further loss of life and casualties, the task which the police performed well. However more should have been done to prevent the incident from taking place. In order to ascertain the motive of the attack some investigations have to take place. The New York police did a good job as they took statements from the witnesses late into the night. Taking of witness statements while the memory is still clear is advisable. Though at times it may be difficult t get statements from a shocked person right after an incidence. Recommendations Police officers should undergo regular training on how to handle different types of guns. It is very significant that the police undergo regular training on how to handle different crime scenarios. This will ensure that if a police officer is confronted with such a situation they will be able to respond effectively. The training should be done at an interval of two years and it should be compulsory for the law enforcement officers. Criminals tend to change tactics from time to time, thus is essential that the police officers receive regular training on how to handle new forms of crimes. This will guarantee that officers are capable of handing situations such as shooters with body armor. Police officers being professionals each and every police officer should customize their firearms so fit their needs. The police officers should add things such as adjustable grips, tactical lights. The accessories will ensure that the officer is able to use the gun comfortably. At times it may be necessary to take shots from far; this can only be possible if an officer is able to hold the gun properly. All officers should attend regular target practice this will ensure that the officers are able to hit targets that are far off even under duress. The police officers should also be trained regularly on maneuvering skills. At times the police have to confront shooters without body armor, thus the police should be trained on the best ways to take cover. Target practice may also prove useful when one is confronting a shooter who has body armor. In such a scenario the target approach has to change the officer will have to shoot at the places that is not covered by the body armor. Some of the paces that a police officer should shoot are the hips. Hitting such a small part of the body requires a lot of accuracy especially when under fire. The most efficient way of dealing with any incident of crime is by preventing it from taking place. More security screening should be introduced in all railway stations, no individual should be allowed to board any mode of public transport while armed. The only persons that should board any public transport systems are security personnel. The Penn station should have not taken place if a proper security screening could have taken place. The organs responsible for the recruitment and training of law enforcers should avail more funds to be used in advance training of the serving officers. This will ensure that the officers remain relevant as they will be able to handle any situation without having to wait for more “experienced” officers. The police should also educate the members of the public on what to do when they find themselves in such a situation. As per the statements of some of the passengers who were on the train, most people did not know what to do. According t the Associated press “As passengers screamed, diving to the floor, the man calmly emptied his gun, reloaded it and began shooting again. He did not utter a word, witnesses said.” At the time the shooter was reloading the passengers could have used the chance to pull the emergency break and get out of the train. All public transport systems should have security marshals at all times. The significance of having security personnel on board is that should a situation such as the Penn station arise appropriate action can be taken. The tactical approach of the police should be changed. Police officers should be trained on how to handle a shooters situation without necessarily waiting for back up. References Baldanza, M. (2005). Fire department response to "active shooter" incidents. Fire Engineering, 158(9), 105. Curry, T. , & Hastlings, J. (2001). Active shooter. Sheriff, 53(3), 21. Dorfsman, J. (2014). Responding to the active shooter. Law & Order, 62(9), 36. Duncan, S. (2008). Pre-incident behavior of active shooters. Law & Order, 56(6), 69. Fassinger, W. (2011). A Grounded Theory Study Investigating Police Training and Interoperability Between Police Agencies During Active Shooter Incidents. n.p.: ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing. Green, D. (2013). Exploring Police Active Shooter Preparedness in Michigan: A Grounded Study of Police Preparedness to Active Shooter Incidents, Developing a Normative Model. n.p.: ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing. Jr, P. (2007). Active shooter's forgotten factor. Law & Order, 55(6), 52. Kirkland, J. (2012). Active-shooter awareness: Relevant and on point. Military Police, 12(1), 32-34. Morrissey, J. (2011). Ems response to active-shooter incidents. EMS World, 40(7), 42. Morrissey, J. (2012). Ems response to active-shooter incidents. EMS World, Roberts, M. (2013). Usfa releases active-shooter policy. Fire Chief. Smith, J. (2013). School violence: Active shooters - part 2. Firehouse, 38(8), 26. Read More