Відео

He's talking about us at the table who have seen training scenarios that stop after threat neutralization without continuing through to the next step.

@@C3PathwaysI get the conversation is taking place around a table, I should have been more specific. Are we talking LEO, SWAT, military?

Sorry, didn't catch that... we are talking about Law Enforcement training, specifically active shooter training. A lot of Law Enforcement active shooter training focuses exclusively on neutralizing the threat and does not include response phases beyond that.

@@C3Pathways that is surprising to hear. I would guess that is because medical assets are not organic to law enforcement response teams. Aside from self aid / buddy aid, wouldn’t there be a dedicated medic during response. I can only speak from a military background where the augmentation of a medic (or crossed trained individuals) are mandatory before a response. Great discussion and I appreciate the replies.

They lied. You are guilty and you have to prove your innocence..

Yes. It's one of the reasons why it is so important to get training right.

Thank you for the comment!

Completely agree. Thank you for commenting.

That is a GREAT question. No, each IC continues to have their own Staging area. The Area Staging Manager will push resources (imagine 20 law enforcement, 5 engine companies, and 5 ambulances) to a specific Incident's Staging. Once checked in, that Incident's Staging Manager would organize them into the needed teams (e.g., Contact Teams, Rescue Task Foces, etc.) and deploy them as requested at that Incident.

@@C3Pathways thank you! I have learned so much from your podcast!

Thank you, it's our pleasure!

I am sure Mike and I know as an officer for years, we utilized the Fire Department (San Marcos, TX I reference in the podcast) many times for the same purpose. Thank you for your service and listening in! Terry Nichols

Thank you!

Hi Josh, I'm not sure I understand your question (comment?)... can you explain a little more?

@@C3Pathways seems pretty self explanatory,no? Im not here to talk,it was just a thought!

I think there's a few options. CT2 could stop to assist, update Tactical and request another CT be sent to linkup with CT1. In other words, "We're not on our original task, send someone else to do that task." If the injured are located near the linkup point, and CT2 team is big enough, you could spread the team out and cover the injured and original task. Or, quickly move the injured to a CCP. If the injured are located too far from CT1 that you would lose sight and voice contact of the team members staying behind, you could split the CT2 team (assuming you have enough people). The challenge for Tactical becomes tracking two parts of the same team on completely different tasks. You could call them CT2-A and CT2-B, but that gets a bit clumsy. In the event of splitting, probably best to let Tactical know what's happening and split into CT2 and CT3. Overall, I would consider the task/assignment of the team, proximity of the team members to coordinate with each other, and your resources (both what you have on the CT2 team and what is or will be coming behind you). IMPORTANTLY, the CT2 team needs to ask, "Where are we on our priorities of 1. Active Threat, 2. Rescue, 3. Clear?" If there is active killing going on, then that is the priority over aid to the injured. If CT1 has reported suspect down, no active killing, etc., then assisting injured is the priority. Hope that helps!

@@C3Pathways thank you for your prompt, I formative reply! I hear you referencing Tactical; is that a police division under command? I come from the fire side, so I'm not familiar with that. Do you have an org chart that you could share? Thanks!

Happy to... see our Active Shooter Incident Management Checklist for the org chart, titles, and assignments at c3.cm/asc

It's our pleasure! We hope it helps.