Thursday, August 16, 2012

Scumfuck Active Shooter Response Protocol

I thought I had the mass shooting thing out of my system with the last post, but apparently not, because I have solved the problem.

This is going to sound weird coming from me because it is a collectivist solution.  I am also going to be considering the strategic problem rather than the tactical scenario.  Finally, because I am a nerd and not a high speed attack ninja, I am going to more or less approach this as a gamer.

So what is the Scumfuck Active Shooter Response Protocol?

Step 1: Determine that there is an active spree shooter present in your venue.
Step 2: Everyone get that motherfucker.

Pretty simple, really, and not that different from what other bloggers have mentioned.  To really understand the strategic goals of the SASRP, we will go over the steps one by one.

Step 1: Determine that there is an active spree shooter present in your venue.  Pretty simple.  Odds are that anyone firing at random into, say, a crowded movie theatre or a prayer meeting is not an officer serving a warrant.  (And even if he is, fuck him, because that is NOT how a peace officer should operate.)

Step 2: Everyone get that motherfucker.  This part is also clinically simple.  Once it has been determined that there is a spree shooter present, your decision tree is down to a very simple gamer's choice: "Missle or Melee, motherfucker?"

Often in the gunblogging community, we get caught up on the gun rights portion of the response.  In my mind, fuck the gun laws, fuck a civillian disarmament zone, and most of all fuck the snivel defense.  Resist-by any means available to you.  If you have a gun, use it by all means-but if you don't, get that motherfucker anyway (Note that there is no step 1.5 "Determine if you have a CCW or not."  If all you have is a pocket knife or a rock or a full soda bottle or a broken pencil-get that motherfucker.

But that isn't the whole story.  Note that it isn't "Get that motherfucker" but "EVERYONE get that motherfucker."  This is the model that assures us of success.  Doesn't matter how badass and well armed you are, if every single motherfucker in that crowded venue rushes up on you and grapples you, there is no way for the spree shooter to accumulate the mass "turkey shoot" casualties as the panicked birds brainlessly present their backs.

There will be some casualties-maybe a lot-but that item, that "Everyone" ensures the success of this model.  And I mean everyone.  That means you, bitch.  Get the fuck up and get that motherfucker.  I don't care that you have kids, I don't care that you have a heart condition, I don't care that you have a chronic phobia of full metal jacketed rounds intersecting your torso.  Get that motherfucker.  Yes, you.  If you are in a fucking wheelchair, I expect you to roll your busted ass down the aisle like a battering ram.  Even if he kills you, you can still get one good lick in to open up a chance for someone else.

So why is this a strategic rather than a tactical model?  Because in the tactical model, its all about your own personal survival, as in "How Do I Maximize My Chances Of Surviving This Event?"

But the strategic model is "How do I stop this and deter similar events in the future?"  Ah, now that is a question of sociology.  What motivates these spree shooting fucks?  The fame and notoriety of being a mass killer.  So being a small time murder who gets beaten down and taken alive without killing more than two or three motherfuckers without going out in a blaze of "glory" is the least desirable overall outcome for these jackoffs.  (Not to mention the hideous disfigurements that are going to come when the angry mob finishes ripping off your MOLLE webbing and starts on your ears and lips instead.)  What these fucks want is some dark poetry, some nihilistic acknowledgement of their status as glorious martyr-killers-so what we give them is a gouged out eyeball and a life sentence in prison.

Two or three public beatdowns on the national news in place of a spree shooting, preferably without mentioning the name of the shooter, and the next guy might just think "Well, fuck it, I'll just go back to work on monday."  Because death is not something that truly deters them-most of them off themselves when they finish their little morality plays.  But ridicule, humiliation, disfigurement...and most of all being cheated of their Mass Media Fame...that might put an actual speedbump on these incidents.  As I said, this is a collectivist strategic view, rather than an individual mandate.  And it only works if it becomes the norm for everyone to fight back.  Of course, a strategy that requires placid, docile Americans to get up and cause a ruckus...especially a ruckus where they might get sued, as somehow we fear lawsuits more than a pretty fuckin' tough sell.  Ugh.

I need to start drinking more.


  1. Question of sociology? Really now, Aristotle. How could the strategic not be the tactical? Talk about sundering! Surely we've got enough false dichotomies already.

    You remind me of me---I was wrong once too, that time I thought I was wrong but was really right. Same thing've got the strategy AND the tactics. The strategy IS the tactic.

    Nobody maximizes the chances of survival in this scenario by scurrying like rats. Aurora is fair evidence of that, yes? The moral is the practical.

    So if the moral is the practical, then WHAT THE FUCK are you doing basing YOUR strategy and YOUR tactics on what the nutcase wants? What could that possibly have to do with anything? This isn't chess or poker, where you're trying to figure what he's figuring that you're figuring and then basing your decisions on that. Those are games, or sport. Wild nutcases are not playing. Hell, they're not even acting human except in the most primal sort of way, which is by being volitional.

    What he's figuring has nothing at all to do with anything. All that matters is what he decided to do. How can YOUR brain time be put to good use trying to figure out WHY he decided to do it? He decided to do it because he's an imbecile. That's quite sufficient, don't you think?

    What matters is how to stop him from doing what he decided to do. In that, I think maybe you've stumbled upon an answer that applies in far wider contexts than a movie least for rational people, that is.

    Rational tactics are built of rational strategies. They are one and the same. The former is just the instantiation of the latter. A thing is as a thing does. In the human realm, there is no dichotomy between a decision (strategy) and its implementation (tactics). Damn, I thought Gump learned that from you.

    1. Pelletfarmer, every time I start responding to this it balloons up into something that is deserving of it's own entry.

      Your objections are worthwhile and I have a sort of nebulous proto-answer, but it will be forthcoming in a later post.

  2. Dude, clean up the language, make it sound all scientific and non-hardcore and shit, and send it out in a LTTE to every newspaper you can find.

    The more people who get to thinking about this, the better.