Viewer Discretion Advised

[TexasRain104]

Got to talking to 3 of my co-workers (one a SGT) and a question surfaced that I thought about bringing to the ECF to find out what the public thought.

I know that we all have heard of the recent/past situations involving school shootings. For this question, you have to do two things. 1) You are now a Police Officer; 2) You cannot change the scenario given.

Scenario:

You are the first Officer on scene of an “Active Shooter” (shooter is still in the building killing) at a High School in your city. You realize that to do any good to anyone inside the school you have to wait for 2-3 more Officers to assist with making entry into the school and search for the suspect. 2 Officers arrive on scene while the school is still emptying and only seconds after you do. You have to make entry into the building now! You fall back on your training because you have 6-8 years on the force.

While walking down the hall way you hear screams, shooting, yelling far into the school. While walking through each hallway as trained, you come to a 14 year of age boy/girl lying on the ground injured, bleeding out. The blood is dark purple indicating that if immediate care is not given, the child will possibly die. You hear more shots and more screaming farther into the building.

Question:

Do you stop give aid (possibly taking the child out of the building leaving the team behind down a man/weapon) or do you search for the suspect knowing that other children will die if you stop?

Question:

Now the child is your child…. Do you stop give aid (possibly taking the child out of the building leaving the team behind down a man/weapon) or do you search for the suspect knowing that other children will die if you stop?

Edit: The second question does not apply to the POLL.....

Edit: including yourself, there are three officers.

 

[Dudeman]

The poll question is an easy answer hands down. The second question is not so easy.

 

[vapordraggin101]

well, seeing that there is 3 officers, i would think the last one would attend to the child.

 

[jiff]

I think that given the scenario, I would choose to take the child and bring them to aid. It's three trained officers against one student. I think two would be able to do the job as well. Plus, there is no reason why after taking the child out of the building I could not catch up or send in additional support.

Given the second question, I think ANYONE would take their child out of there. That's when instinct takes over and blows training out of the water.

 

[chrisl317]

Save the child either way. The other two officers don't have to engage the shooter, just buy time. I remember this from the service that you can bleed to death quicker than suffocating.

Stop the bleeding
Start the breathing
Protect the wound
Treat for shock

It's always stuck with me.

 

[satoshi]

I'd assist the other officers because shouldn't the first priority be to kill the shooter? It seems like the question is trying to see if this hypothetical cop would allow his emotions to get in the way of the plan.

If it were my kid though, I'd take them out of there immediately.

 

[voltaire]

The way I see it, the injured kid may die even with aid. There is still active shooting and screaming, indicating other potential and present victims. There may just be another kid even more gravely injured around the corner, and likely others not yet injured who may be if the shooter isn't stopped or at least interrupted from shooting defenseless victims.

Not an easy call, but that's what I would do. Now if it were my kid, yeah, that's easy, and would be a whole different story - I doubt anybody would realistically do otherwise.

ETA: The clincher is the continued shooting and screaming, if all were quiet at that point, I would render aid to the injured kid first.

 

[Drozd]

given the senario...and that nothing in the senario can change...I'd say option A assist fellow officers...
Why...because according to senario it's only you and 2 other officers on scene...no medics...so carrying the child out won't do any good for their immediate attention if there's no one to tend their wounds...moving them may prove detrimental...and you leave your team one man/weapon down...

 

[Lightgeoduck]

Yeah,,, if you have two other officers in the building... I would take the child to get some aid... either situation my child or other's...... 2 trained officers are enough to try and maintain the situation.... I will return to assist once the child is in safe hands....

 

[chrisl317]

The problem with leaving the child un-aided is that I can guarantee you someone's going to ask why you left that kid there to die, alone. You will be vilified in the after action reports and debriefings. Then you're going to have the media also. What if that kid would've been the only survivor of the shooting and you didn't even stop to render aid?

 

[CaptJay]

I also went with 'aid' because the child WILL die if you leave it but the officers only MAY need assistance, and there are 2 of them to back each other up but the child only has YOU.
I guess then Id run back in to help the others, as in this scenario Im not a doctor but a member of some kind of police service.

 

[four2109]

Eliminate the threat so medical personnel can enter the building.

 

[Thyestean]

Well heck if you're going to add question two then you might as well add question 3 and see what answers you get...

Question:

Now the child is your child but you also have another child in the school …. Do you stop give aid (possibly taking the child out of the building leaving the team behind down a man/weapon) or do you search for the suspect knowing that other children will die if you stop?

 

[msqun]

Eliminate the threat so medical personnel can enter the building.

This was my thought. As much as emotion would have me wanting to stop and help (especially being female AND going into nursing) I still believe that IF we are to be successful on our "mission" then we must take control of the overall situation NOW and take care of the wounded LATER. Just my

My kid, yeah, no brainer.....

Since however I am NOT a medical person in the scenario and I am an Officer....UNLESS my first aid training is sufficient to treat my child with any benefit AT all...and given no medical personnel has yet arrived in the scenario.....believe it OR not, I would ATTEMPT to force myself to quietly hug and comfort my child QUICKLY and move on to stop the shooter from taking someone elses child from them.
I'm NOT quite SURE that I'd be able to do that, but that is where my heart would be....instinctually I'd grab my kid and get OUT of there and HELP until HELP arrived then do what I could to inform other officers of what is going on inside.

 

[zoiDman]

When you look at most city or state law enforcement vehicles, you will see the phrase “Serve and Protect”. There is a reason that the words are in this order.


For question #1

In the hypothetical situation describe by the OP, there is an Immediate Imminent Danger to the life of the child that is injured. Where as the “screams, shooting, yelling” do not positively confirm that there are more injured individuals. Almost all department policy is to “Serve” the confirmed injured first before attempting to “Protect” the uninjured.

Also, the decision to leave the child and “search for the suspect knowing that other children will die if you stop.” is false because the LEO in this case does not have anyway of knowing that his/her actions will actually stop someone from becoming injured or dying.

For question #2

For most people, the bond between a Parent and a Child is one that is stronger than any amount of training. In the given situation, just about any parent, no matter what their occupation or amount of “training” they had received, would seek immediate medical attention for their child.



All though this is a classic question asked on many psychological screening tests, it fails to address one issue. People in life threatening situations do not always act the same as they under normal conditions. I have seen the most hardcore war fighters freeze under fire.

I also have seen the most timid, meek individual you will ever meet stand in withering small arms fire and empty every magazine they had to provide cover fire to a retreating element. When asked why he risked his life in what seemed to be a hopeless cause, he said that it was because they had the same color uniforms is he did.

Like I said, people don’t always act exactly as they are trained to do. And every situation is different. But the training a LEO or War Fighter receives is based not on the Complete prevention of injury or death. It is based on the Minimization of injury and death.

 

[chrisl317]

Excellent, zoiDman!

 

[ejoker]

i am not in law enforcement, but given the scenario and i now have 6-8 years experience, i imagine my training would dictate the appropriate course of action. iow, however i was trained would determine path a or b.

question 2 - no question. those 2 officers are on their own for now.

 

[ab357]

Since I happen to have 20+ years experience on the street as a LEO on the local and federal level before going into intelligence, I would fall back on my training. Considering that the three first responders will likely not include a certified swat medic, I would quickly triage and report his exact location. I know a med team will follow as we have cleared the area. My primary function is to stop the shooter/s.

My kid or a fellow LEO? I'm going to do at least a quick "pressure pack" before moving on. My mind has to be clear enough to continue. I have to know I did enough to keep him hopefully alive until the medics get in.

Plus the sooner we can declare the area clear, the sooner qualified medical personnel can come in and save him. And I won't risk more children being shot.

If my kid is clearly dying and no matter what anyone does, you know it won't save him; I'm staying with him until his last breath.

 

[nansc]

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.