Sadly, overly dramatic music.

Had to giggle a bit, when one of the first scenes shows the active shooter entering the building. Right through a door reminding everyone that the building is a ‘gun free’ zone. While the narrator tells us that the govt is working hard to disarm, I mean protect, you.

Solid reminder that politicians don’t realize that only the law abiding follow laws. Having a concealed carry person or three in the building would have reduced the efficacy of the active shooter. May have even deterred him altogether, if he didn’t know that everyone in the building was disarmed.

But hey, what do I know:)

Thanks for posting Eric. This offers a good common sense approach to an 'active shooter' scenario. I especially liked that they recommended those leaving the area to keep their hands visible and not to point. The tactical team always has a difficult time separating the green from the red. This is a helpful suggestion.

...Solid reminder that politicians don’t realize that only the law abiding follow laws. Having a concealed carry person or three in the building would have reduced the efficacy of the active shooter. May have even deterred him altogether, if he didn’t know that everyone in the building was disarmed.

But hey, what do I know:)

The law abiding don't always follow the law. Convicted criminals don't commit all the crimes.

If they made it a prerequisite that to qualify for a concealed carry permit; the applicant had to shoot a perfect combat course, I'd agree with you. Unfortunately this isn't the case. As a tactical team member it would scare the hell out of me to go into a scene with a shooter and 'a person or three' people armed and untrained. That doesn't make my day better...

...Solid reminder that politicians don’t realize that only the law abiding follow laws. Having a concealed carry person or three in the building would have reduced the efficacy of the active shooter. May have even deterred him altogether, if he didn’t know that everyone in the building was disarmed.

But hey, what do I know:)

The law abiding don't always follow the law. Convicted criminals don't commit all the crimes.

If they made it a prerequisite that to qualify for a concealed carry permit; the applicant had to shoot a perfect combat course, I'd agree with you. Unfortunately this isn't the case. As a tactical team member it would scare the hell out of me to go into a scene with a shooter and 'a person or three' people armed and untrained. That doesn't make my day better...

Very rhetorical discussion since we’re likely closer to lose more gun “right” than to ever gain CCW licences in Canada.

But for the fun of discussing...

I say why not, let’s make applicants attain and prove the same standards that police officers and cash service guards have to. I’m sure it can’t be that hard and if someone really wanted the licence, they’d train for it.

I remember living in southern US where the state had a “shall issue” approach to CCW. For $20/yr and a 5 question background check, you could carry a pistol everywhere you wanted (except government building, police/Sherriff offices and jails, school properties and bars - or restaurants where 51% or more of their revenues came from the sale of alcohol)

helicopilot,

I don't see anything rhetorical about it. How can Society lower the risk of an active shooter situation? It's been suggested that arming citizens would be beneficial. I've responded. What do you think?

It’s only rhetorical in that I can’t ever see Canada letting the civilian populace carrying concealed weapons.

Heck, in AB we have slews of “Peace Officers” doing effectively policing duties (ranging from bylaws to traffic enforcement) and only armed them with a baton and OC spray! Think there’s an interest in letting Joe Canuck carry a Glock42 in his waistband? BTW, the whole Peace Officer thing is a complete missed opportunity IMHO. I say give them a few more weeks of training and pay them another 10 grands a year and you just got yourself an additional pool of ressources in the event of a shooter scenario. Otherwise, they’ll just be running out like everyone else.

It’s only rhetorical in that I can’t ever see Canada letting the civilian populace carrying concealed weapons.

I could never imagine Canada legalizing homosexuality or marijuana. Times do change and opinions do swing back and forth. Nothing seems to surprise me anymore.

Heck, in AB we have slews of “Peace Officers” doing effectively policing duties (ranging from bylaws to traffic enforcement) and only armed them with a baton and OC spray! Think there’s an interest in letting Joe Canuck carry a Glock42 in his waistband? BTW, the whole Peace Officer thing is a complete missed opportunity IMHO. I say give them a few more weeks of training and pay them another 10 grands a year and you just got yourself an additional pool of ressources in the event of a shooter scenario. Otherwise, they’ll just be running out like everyone else.

The move toward private policing in Ontario may do the same thing, but the bar hasn't been held high enough.. The problem is (imo) attributable to the level of training that's done and the level of competence required (what's deemed good enough). It should be more like the aviation industry (something I know you're conversant with).

Personally, I'd promote a higher level of firearms competence within the police department. More training in combat scenarios would be a prerequisite. It's the tactical teams that receive what's necessary by way of training, equipment and ammunition. Funding is really limited in this area for the rank and file.

Not too convinced by your arguments. Over the years, there’s been an increasing trend in acceptance toward drug legalization (decriminalization) and homosexuality. Therefore seeing gay marriages isn’t a surprise. On the other end, hunters and sportsmen are also increasingly facing new regulations and national pressures towards more gun control. It would be a considerable 180 to not only reverse the gun control movement, but get it to a point where CCW is legal.

Unlike our counterparts to the south, we also don’t have the legislation in place to protect someone defending themselves. What good would a CCW law be if it guarantees you 20 years in prison for manslaughter or assault with a deadly weapon?

It’s only rhetorical in that I can’t ever see Canada letting the civilian populace carrying concealed weapons.

...

Personally, I'd promote a higher level of firearms competence within the police department. More training in combat scenarios would be a prerequisite. It's the tactical teams that receive what's necessary by way of training, equipment and ammunition. Funding is really limited in this area for the rank and file.

I had a rather long response written and then chose to delete it.

I will only mention a couple of points:

According to international law, police officers are considered civilians so should abide by the same laws as anybody else.

Competence within the police department? Six months at depot (or police acacademy) to train a recruit? Even a school teacher is required to have a five year degree to practice their trade. Two years training to be a forestry technician. Six months and some professional development courses only instills arrogance aka "Esprit de Corps".

Most of the cops that I know can't shoot worth a darn. Outside of major metropolitan areas, if we wait for a tactical team to arrive in the active shooter scenario, response time would probably be measured in hours.

...It would be a considerable 180 to not only reverse the gun control movement, but get it to a point where CCW is legal.

The long gun registry was reversed. This was a 180 degree change of direction to what was previously taken. Like I mentioned, it has swung in both directions over time. Don't be surprised if it changes direction again.

Unlike our counterparts to the south, we also don’t have the legislation in place to protect someone defending themselves. What good would a CCW law be if it guarantees you 20 years in prison for manslaughter or assault with a deadly weapon?

I believe that Section 25 of the Criminal Code outlines the use of force by law enforcement. Personal defence (Section 34) and defence of property (Section 35) offer public protections. The reasonableness of the response is the standard for assessment.

According to international law, police officers are considered civilians so should abide by the same laws as anybody else.

This isn't true in Canada. Police are afforded protections under the Criminal Code that the public don't have (unless they're aiding police). Provincial statutes have specific sections where they're allowed to break the law in the performance of their duties (speeding for example).

Competence within the police department? Six months at depot (or police acacademy) to train a recruit? Even a school teacher is required to have a five year degree to practice their trade. Two years training to be a forestry technician. Six months and some professional development courses only instills arrogance aka "Esprit de Corps".

Most police officers on the job that I know have a university degree. Many have specialties in criminology, sociology or law. Others have a minimum of a two year college course in police science. The prerequisites vary between departments, but the selection process can be difficult.

After you're selected, you have one or two courses you must attend. Depot for the RCMP and the Ontario Police College (or other provincial counterpart) and private institutions such as the Ontario Provincial Police College. You are then assigned to a Division or Detachment. Over the next year you're on probation and assigned to a training officer.

Like in any job, no one's perfect. You eventually get your feet under you and move forward. Like any group of people, you have some better than others and there's the occasional bad one. The force has a tendency to weed out the bad ones or put them in meaningless positions.

Most of the cops that I know can't shoot worth a darn. Outside of major metropolitan areas, if we wait for a tactical team to arrive in the active shooter scenario, response time would probably be measured in hours.

Police have to qualify periodically. This varies from ongoing qualifications in the tactical team to monthly or yearly sessions (depending on the Department and assignment). Positions like being an air marshal require a higher level of skill-set than a patrol officer for example. I agree that most police officers could use more practice.