DHS Funded Video Suggests Fighting “Active Shooters” With “Improvised Weapons”

[John F Kennedy III]

DHS Funded Video Suggests Fighting “Active Shooters” With “Improvised Weapons”


Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
July 27, 2012

Video does not dare suggest that a firearm would be more effective at warding off an attacker than a fire extinguisher.


In the wake of the shooting in Aurora, Colorado, the Department of Homeland Security and the city of Houston, Texas, have released a instructional video on what to do during an “active shooter” event.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5VcSwejU2D0

Entitled “Run, Hide, Fight,” the video depicts a fictional shooting incident at an office building. It tells citizens they should try to escape a shooter by running, hiding, or as a last resort fighting. “As a last resort, working together or alone, act with aggression, use improvised weapons and fight,” the City of Houston Mayor’s Office of Public Safety and Homeland Security instruct.

If potential victims, however, were armed and trained in the proper use of firearms, ineffectual “improvised weapons” would not be necessary.

Currently, 43 states allow the open carry of handguns. According to the Armed Citizens League (ACL), of those states, only 14 require a citizen to possess a concealed carry permit to legally participate in open carry while other states, like Virginia, have no permit requirements.

“Let’s remember, the heinous crimes committed at Columbine, Virginia Tech and most recently in Arizona were all committed with legally purchased guns. Let’s ask ourselves, if a carry permit issued by a state, or denial thereof, would have changed anything in the hearts and minds of the criminals who committed these violent acts,” the ACL noted prior to the event in Colorado.

“Gun ownership isn’t about duck hunting, it’s about saving your life and defending all the civil liberties we enjoy in this country,” said Dick Heller following the Aurora shooting. Heller is the plaintiff in the landmark gun rights Supreme Court decision, District of Columbia v. Heller. “In Colorado, I am surprised someone wasn’t armed to be able to defend themselves or to shoot back,” he said.

Heller told Human Events a community armed and trained in the use of firearms is a strong deterrent to a potential shooter. “Because the shooter does not know what their risk level is.”

We shouldn’t expect, however, the Department of Homeland Security to call for armed citizens to fight back. Government is opposed to citizens taking on the responsibility of their own defense and are actively working to disarm the people, as a blizzard of gun laws and other restrictions on the Second Amendment reveal.

Instead, they would have us fight against shooters armed with 12-gauge pump shotguns – as depicted in the above video – with fire extinguishers.


original article here:
http://www.infowars.com/dhs-funded-video-suggests-fighting-active-shooters-with-improvised-weapons/

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

DHS Funded Video Suggests Fighting “Active Shooters” With “Improvised Weapons”


Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
July 27, 2012

Video does not dare suggest that a firearm would be more effective at warding off an attacker than a fire extinguisher.


In the wake of the shooting in Aurora, Colorado, the Department of Homeland Security and the city of Houston, Texas, have released a instructional video on what to do during an “active shooter” event.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5VcSwejU2D0

Entitled “Run, Hide, Fight,” the video depicts a fictional shooting incident at an office building. It tells citizens they should try to escape a shooter by running, hiding, or as a last resort fighting. “As a last resort, working together or alone, act with aggression, use improvised weapons and fight,” the City of Houston Mayor’s Office of Public Safety and Homeland Security instruct.

If potential victims, however, were armed and trained in the proper use of firearms, ineffectual “improvised weapons” would not be necessary.

Currently, 43 states allow the open carry of handguns. According to the Armed Citizens League (ACL), of those states, only 14 require a citizen to possess a concealed carry permit to legally participate in open carry while other states, like Virginia, have no permit requirements.

“Let’s remember, the heinous crimes committed at Columbine, Virginia Tech and most recently in Arizona were all committed with legally purchased guns. Let’s ask ourselves, if a carry permit issued by a state, or denial thereof, would have changed anything in the hearts and minds of the criminals who committed these violent acts,” the ACL noted prior to the event in Colorado.

“Gun ownership isn’t about duck hunting, it’s about saving your life and defending all the civil liberties we enjoy in this country,” said Dick Heller following the Aurora shooting. Heller is the plaintiff in the landmark gun rights Supreme Court decision, District of Columbia v. Heller. “In Colorado, I am surprised someone wasn’t armed to be able to defend themselves or to shoot back,” he said.

Heller told Human Events a community armed and trained in the use of firearms is a strong deterrent to a potential shooter. “Because the shooter does not know what their risk level is.”

We shouldn’t expect, however, the Department of Homeland Security to call for armed citizens to fight back. Government is opposed to citizens taking on the responsibility of their own defense and are actively working to disarm the people, as a blizzard of gun laws and other restrictions on the Second Amendment reveal.

Instead, they would have us fight against shooters armed with 12-gauge pump shotguns – as depicted in the above video – with fire extinguishers.


original article here:
http://www.infowars.com/dhs-funded-video-suggests-fighting-active-shooters-with-improvised-weapons/

I don't own a gun to hunt or to protect myself. My intentions are to assault tyranny with it. That's right. Assault.

[Zippyjuan]

“Let’s remember, the heinous crimes committed at Columbine, Virginia Tech and most recently in Arizona were all committed with legally purchased guns. Let’s ask ourselves, if a carry permit issued by a state, or denial thereof, would have changed anything in the hearts and minds of the criminals who committed these violent acts,” the ACL noted prior to the event in Colorado.

Colorado does have carry permits. Did that deter Holmes? He wore protective armor just in case.

[phill4paul]

Here's another DHS video on what to do if you confront an attacker....

http://img.ffffound.com/static-data/assets/6/bdcaccba2b36a1b31b83413149fd68229310c6e1_m.gif

[jmdrake]

History repeats itself.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_tKAg5KIuQ&feature=player_detailpage

[jmdrake]

Colorado does have carry permits. Did that deter Holmes? He wore protective armor just in case.

Ummm....no. He wore a tactical vest. All it did was let him carry extra clips.

http://www.greenvilledragnet.com/rotten-reporting-james-holmes-was-not-wearing-a-bulletproof-vest/

[Revolution9]

History repeats itself.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_tKAg5KIuQ&feature=player_detailpage

"Little-dumdum-little-dumdum"<singing>

Rev9

[phill4paul]

History repeats itself.

deedle, dumb, dumb...deedle, dumb, dumb...deedle, dumb, dumb...

ETA: Lol. Got the draw on me that time Rev9.

[jkr]

they are telling us how we can protect ourselves when they destroy all the guns...except for the usual suspects.

[Brian4Liberty]

History repeats itself.


Lol! I said the same thing during a discussion last weekend. A bunch of people were talking about how it is so "scary" these days, and they have to teach the kids at school what to do in case of a shooter. "Gee, when we were kids, all we had to worry about was ducking under our desk to await a nuclear fireball."

[Brian4Liberty]

In the wake of the shooting in Aurora, Colorado, the Department of Homeland Security and the city of Houston, Texas, have released a instructional video on what to do during an “active shooter” event.

Wow, they actually did something useful. They probably even did it without first consulting the SPLC.

[phill4paul]

Lol! I said the same thing during a discussion last weekend. A bunch of people were talking about how it is so "scary" these days, and they have to teach the kids at school what to do in case of a shooter. "Gee, when we were kids, all we had to worry about was ducking under our desk to await a nuclear fireball."

Either you are much older than I or you hang out at assisted living homes.

[AuH20]

This may be a little off-topic, but wasn't MacGuyver an anti-gun show??

[Tyler_Durden]

So according to this video, when the Feds send in the guys from Blackwater aka XE Services aka Academi, you should only resist with fire extinguishers, belts wrapped around your fists, and chairs. Sounds about right.....

[Brian4Liberty]

Either you are much older than I or you hang out at assisted living homes.

Lol. By sheer coincidence, I will be at an "independent" living complex tomorrow visiting my grandfather.

Duck and cover for nukes lasted until the 80s. They may still do it for earthquakes in California (sans the vintage cartoons).


Duck and Cover was a suggested method of personal protection against the effects of a nuclear weapon, which the United States government taught to generations of United States school children from the early 1950s into the 1980s.

[phill4paul]

Lol. By sheer coincidence, I will be at an "independent" living complex tomorrow visiting my grandfather.

Duck and cover for nukes lasted until the 80s. They may still do it for earthquakes in California (sans the vintage cartoons).

For myself...graduated early 80's. Grew up in my pre-teens on Air Force bases. Never 'covered and duck.' Experience, always, may vary.

[John F Kennedy III]

The duck and cover thing was never intended to help during a nuclear blast. It was only intended to instill fear of a foreign enemy into the minds of school children.

[AuH20]

The duck and cover thing was never intended to help during a nuclear blast. It was only intended to instill fear of a foreign enemy into the minds of school children.

Actually, I think the desired effect was to alleviate fear and panic. The authorities were fully aware that they couldn't protect the populace from a nuclear explosion above-ground, so they conjured up this feel good nonsense.

[roho76]

Lol. By sheer coincidence, I will be at an "independent" living complex tomorrow visiting my grandfather.

Duck and cover for nukes lasted until the 80s. They may still do it for earthquakes in California (sans the vintage cartoons).

What's really messed up is the fact, that our government knows that getting under your desk and covering your head with your book was not going to keep you from being killed. People would have probably been safer if they said nothing at all and just let it happen if it was going to. Those drills, in which I myself participated in the first few years of schooling, are meant for mental control. Nothing more. Why do people allow themselves to led around like dogs?

[phill4paul]

Actually, I think the desired effect was to alleviate fear and panic. The authorities were fully aware that they couldn't protect the populace from a nuclear explosion above-ground, so they conjured up this feel good nonsense.

'feel good nonsense' with a purpose. Both of you have it right and are closer than you are far.

[LibForestPaul]

What's really messed up is the fact, that our government knows that getting under your desk and covering your head with your book was not going to keep you from being killed. People would have probably been safer if they said nothing at all and just let it happen if it was going to. Those drills, in which I myself participated in the first few years of schooling, are meant for mental control. Nothing more. Why do people allow themselves to led around like dogs?

No,no, if you pointed your @ss at the direction of the fireball you were safe.

I actually had about 6 mo of panic after watching a special PBS scientific show about nuclear weapons, specifically the 10megaton and up hydrogen bombs. At any moment, humanity can still be wiped from the face of this earth.

[Tiso0770]

Yea sure, like that's gonna stave off a 800 pound charging bear or something....what next, death by teacup....lol.

[Proph]

Yea sure, like that's gonna stave off a 800 pound charging bear or something....what next, death by teacup....lol.
Apparently you've never seen Chronicles of Riddick. I wanted to know what he was going to do next with the safety pin.

[Working Poor]

Lol! I said the same thing during a discussion last weekend. A bunch of people were talking about how it is so "scary" these days, and they have to teach the kids at school what to do in case of a shooter. "Gee, when we were kids, all we had to worry about was ducking under our desk to await a nuclear fireball."

I remember having to prepare for the nukes. My brothers and I declared to our parents that we would run home to get our dog and keep her out of harms way. They were very concerned about it and made up a story that our dog would come and find us and that she would be okay. My mom said something the other day about how worried she and my dad were about one of us or all of us trying to get home to our beloved pet.

[ClydeCoulter]

Actually, I think the desired effect was to alleviate fear and panic. The authorities were fully aware that they couldn't protect the populace from a nuclear explosion above-ground, so they conjured up this feel good nonsense.

Bull, it was fear of an enemy, otherwise, they could have just not said, "If a nuke comes at us.....", why mention anything?

[Brian4Liberty]

I remember having to prepare for the nukes. My brothers and I declared to our parents that we would run home to get our dog and keep her out of harms way. They were very concerned about it and made up a story that our dog would come and find us and that she would be okay. My mom said something the other day about how worried she and my dad were about one of us or all of us trying to get home to our beloved pet.

Yeah, it seems to be the human state that children will be scared by something (well, that "something" generally comes from society and the parents). The kids will attempt to address that threat the best they can.

"We don't need no education!"

[brushfire]

I can only imagine what one of the Aurora victoms would think of this video. I know I would be insulted.

The government says:

You should run
You should hide
You should fight

Just how f'n stupid do they think people are? Was this seriously produced with the intention of saving people?
They basically described every instinctive action that would occur during an "active shooter" incident. They actually forgot one - "Play dead if you are shot".

This stupid video, brought to you by the same morons that think you're too stupid to have a firearm.

[John F Kennedy III]

Yeah, it seems to be the human state that children will be scared by something (well, that "something" generally comes from society and the parents). The kids will attempt to address that threat the best they can.

"We don't need no education!"

How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?

[AuH20]

Bull, it was fear of an enemy, otherwise, they could have just not said, "If a nuke comes at us.....", why mention anything?

The nuclear threat was highly publicized at that time and for good reason. Secondly, the government was not going to cede the mantle as the ultimate defenders of the citizenry. That is a very powerful illusion that they needed to maintain.

[Pericles]

I have been giving the problem some thought, and my solution is to be found here:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?384554-Personal-Defense-Carry-Considerations

[AME3]

The truth I believe in regards to the "duck and cover" that was taught to the kids during the 50's and 60's was based on nuclear tests and just plain old common sense. A desk for example is a good thing to be under if a ceiling was to fall onto you. There are a lot of earthquake survivors right here in the US that can attest to that I bet.
Initial survival from a bomb blast is contingent on the distance and / or whatever shielding is between yourself and the force. Simple physics. The bombs that were dropped on Japan didn't kill everyone. There were many thousands of survivors in both cities that were shielded adequately or far enough away from ground zero to survive. Many are still alive today in fact.

[Brian4Liberty]

True story: after going through many years of earthquake duck and cover with the same group of kids, we finally did have a pretty good earthquake. Everyone jumped under the desks and rode it out (quite a ride). As soon as it was done, the class clown jumped up and yelled "I've been waiting my whole life to do that!" :)

[ClydeCoulter]

The nuclear threat was highly publicized at that time and for good reason. Secondly, the government was not going to cede the mantle as the ultimate defenders of the citizenry. That is a very powerful illusion that they needed to maintain.

They (government) create the problem, publicize a view to create a state of fear, and offer a solution to the problem they create. Then, they are the heros.

This works in work life as well. I have seen, with my own eyes, ladder-climbers create problems (in secret) and offer the solution when the problem is discovered. All planned. They end up with promotions for doing nothing but create-problem/solve-problem. I watched as a group of guys climbed from programmers to positions of exec-directors and a CIO and I had to work with them (do their work for them).

It's all the same, and these kinds of people are running/ruining/raping the country & the world.

[tangent4ronpaul]

The truth I believe in regards to the "duck and cover" that was taught to the kids during the 50's and 60's was based on nuclear tests and just plain old common sense. A desk for example is a good thing to be under if a ceiling was to fall onto you. There are a lot of earthquake survivors right here in the US that can attest to that I bet.


This is controversial, but the mantra should be "Duck, Cover and Die!"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U-zEvwlfzY&feature=player_embedded

http://www.amerrescue.org/triangleoflife.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_of_Life

The arguments against it (triangle of life) are that our buildings are so strong they will never pancake (like the WTC or the OK city bombing), unlike in foreign countries. They also say that in earthquakes, furniture tends to move around. No one has commented about the likelihood of building collapse in a nuclear war, and thinking of Fuckusima(sp?) parts of reactor buildings collapsed - and that is a heavily reinforced structure!

He gets the bottom line in the video right - high numbers of survivors in major disasters is very undesirable from the government's and insurance company's perspective.

-t

[AuH20]

The truth I believe in regards to the "duck and cover" that was taught to the kids during the 50's and 60's was based on nuclear tests and just plain old common sense. A desk for example is a good thing to be under if a ceiling was to fall onto you. There are a lot of earthquake survivors right here in the US that can attest to that I bet.
Initial survival from a bomb blast is contingent on the distance and / or whatever shielding is between yourself and the force. Simple physics. The bombs that were dropped on Japan didn't kill everyone. There were many thousands of survivors in both cities that were shielded adequately or far enough away from ground zero to survive. Many are still alive today in fact.
The radiation poisoning will kill you in a day or two if you're in the relative proximity. Getting under the desk is going to do very little in that regard.

[Weston White]

The revised DHS plan, because we care, no really, we truly do, (otherwise deemed the: "it didn't work then, but it shalt for you" plan):


http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/183/766/bush-shoe-throw-03.gif

[tangent4ronpaul]

The revised DHS plan, because we care, no really, we truly do, (otherwise deemed the: "it didn't work then, but it shalt for you" plan):


http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/183/766/bush-shoe-throw-03.gif

I've always wondered if that reporter got his shoe back... but I digress...

As to the DHS vid - fighting someone with a shotgun using a folding chair is kind of like a VW Bug's chances against a semi-tractor trailer in a game of chicken... totally ridiculous!

Any bets about if they produced a secret video in tandem for SWAT teams on how best to neutralize civilians wielding folding chairs and fire extinguishers? :rolleyes:

-t