Skip to main content

Analysis in Reverse of the Parkland, FL Shooting

Analysis in Reverse of the Parkland, FL Shooting

By Jon C. Paul

When we examine an incident like a mass shooting, we usually start at the beginning - most often the bad gun - until we reach the end of the story, when the bad gun kills innocent people. So this time, let's analyze the Parkland, Florida mass shooting in reverse order - from the horrific ending to its genesis - to try to determine what the causes were. Maybe we can see things differently...

Ending: Innocent people died needlessly.

Cause: A bad and/or sick individual shot them.

Why: We don't really know the shooter's motive at this time.

How did this happen: A person shot innocent people while walking through the school.

Cause: There was nothing to stop, impede, confront or engage the shooter from roaming through the school and shooting people.

Why: The school had no camera surveillance system monitored in real time to observe the shooter and track his movements in order to more quickly notify the persons in the most immediate danger. The school had no physical barriers which could have been activated to partition the building to limit the areas where the shooter could roam. The school had no competent, properly-trained, armed law enforcement or security personnel present in the building who could have immediately engaged the shooter. The school had an armed law enforcement outside building who, for whatever reason, failed to enter the school to engage the shooter. The school had no other armed non-law enforcement or -security personnel inside the building who could have engaged the shooter more quickly. In summary, the school did not have a comprehensive, adequate response plan for dealing with an active shooter incident.

How did this happen: The shooter was able to gain access to all areas of the school.

Cause: There was nothing to screen persons who had entered the school.

Why: The school had no staffing or physical devices to screen persons who had entered the school. The school had no camera surveillance system monitored in real time to monitor doors to determine who had entered. The school was not physically configured so that persons entering the school were funneled to a staffed area where the persons could be screened. The school was not physically configured and/or secured so that persons who had entered the school were limited to specific areas of the buildings. In summary, the school did not have a comprehensive plan for dealing with persons who had gained entrance inside the buildings.

How did this happen: The shooter walked into the school while armed.

Cause: There was nothing to prevent, delay or deter the shooter from entering the school.

Why: The door(s) to the school was not locked. The school had no camera surveillance system monitored in real time to identify persons attempting to gain entry into the school. The school had no voice communication system/intercom to at least question/screen persons attempting to gain entry into the buildings. The school had no security or other personnel staffing doors to identify, admit, impede or prevent persons seeking to gain entry into the buildings. In summary, the school did not have an adequate access system for controlling persons seeking entry into the buildings.

How did this happen: A person, while armed, walked across school property up to the door of the school.

Cause: There was nothing to prevent, delay or deter the person from being on school property.

Why: The school had no camera surveillance system monitored in real time to identify persons on school property. The school had no security or other personnel patrolling the grounds to identify, screen, impede or prevent unauthorized persons from being on school property. The school grounds had no perimeter fencing or other barriers to restrict, impede or prevent unauthorized persons from being on school property In summary, the school did not have adequate security measures for controlling the presence of unauthorized persons on school property.

How did this happen: This shooter had access to weapons and was not monitored or controlled despite apparently aberrant behaviors.

Cause: Persons with personal knowledge of this shooter , including friends, neighbors and adoptive parents were unsuccessful in getting the help for the person that was needed.

Why: This person led a troubled life for a substantial period of time prior to the date of this incident.  But he did not commit acts sufficiently egregious or aberrant to warrant involuntary mental health or criminal justice system intervention. This young man resisted attempts by his school to provide mental health assistance. Despite reports to authorities about this person's in-person and online behaviors, no formal investigation was conducted of him. Despite formal complaints about this person to law enforcement authorities and personal interactions between him and law enforcement authorities, no formal criminal justice or rehabilitative actions were taken against him. In fact, this person's adoptive family stated that they were unaware of the kinds of behaviors exhibited by him that were easily uncovered and brought to light within only a few hours of the shooting. In summary, despite observable behaviors that should have resulted in formal, involuntary law enforcement or mental health intervention, this person was able to go about his life in an unimpeded and unrestricted manner, planning and preparing for this incident.

The above analysis of the Parkland, FL mass shooting by a troubled young man demonstrates that no single act or omission is the sole cause of incidents such as these. From the genesis of this troubled young man who slipped through gaping law enforcement and mental health cracks, to the failures of the shooting site to adequately protect itself from incidents such as this - numerous failures on multiple levels were instrumental in allowing such a tragedy to occur.

And it also points out that there is no single solution to prevent such incidents from occurring again.

Jon C. Paul, CPP is an independent Security Consultant and Court-recognized security expert, Board Certified in security management. Mr. Paul's business, Special Service, provides outsourced security consulting and management services as well as litigation support for matters related to security. Mr. Paul's blog, The Security Consultant, features both conceptual and practical commentary on a wide variety of security-related issues. http://specialservice-security.com/ http://thesecurityconsultant.blogspot.com/

Article Source:  Analysis in Reverse of the Parkland, FL Shooting

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Kecemburuan semacam ini

Jacey melemparkan cangkir kopi kaca, (Mug Kaca Berinsulasi Dinding Ganda Zwilling), melintasi dapur. Itu menghantam dinding yang baru dicat (Behr, Sweet Coconut Milk, M230), dan hancur menjadi triliunan kepingan. "Inilah yang telah kamu lakukan pada kami!" teriaknya, suaranya berderak karena cemburu, kuku jarinya yang terawat (Orly Cold As Ice - perawatan bernapas + warna) menusuk udara ke arah tumpukan puing-puing kaca. Blayne menundukkan kepalanya, dagu keduanya mengenai dadanya terlebih dahulu. "Maaf, sayang," gumamnya. "Maaf?! Maaf!" Dia mengambil sekotak Wheat Thins dan mengangkatnya di atas kepalanya. "Tolong jangan melempar yang lain!" Blayne memohon, berdiri dari posisi setengah duduk di bangku logam di dapur. Ini adalah bangku yang sangat tidak nyaman (Bangku Meja Grejsi dengan Bingkai Logam), tetapi Jacey menyukai cara logam itu memantulkan sinar matahari di sore hari, jadi itulah yang dia beli. Dia mencondongkan tubuh ke arahnya,...

Thirteenth step

My grandmother attends the church basement on Tuesday evenings. I saw him there among the metal folding chairs and antique coffee pots, his figure trembling under the fluorescent lights that buzzed like dying insects. She wears the same powder blue pullover she was buried in, the one with pearl buttons that catch the light like little moons. Others can't see it, of course. They just feel a sudden chill as they pass by where she is, or smell the ghostly smell of her Shalimar perfume mixing with the smell of burnt coffee that never leaves these rooms. But I see clearly. He's been following me to AA meetings for three months since I got my first white chip after five years of being back in the bottle. "Your grandmother was my godmother in 1985," old Pete told me after tonight's meeting, hands shaking as he poured a seven-pack of Sweet'n Low into his coffee. "Toughest godmother I ever had. She saved my life." "Mine, too," I said, not specif...

A-Z of Corporate Governance Law

Corporate governance law can be seen as the law that states the way a company is regulated and managed. Any student of law must have a clear idea about the corporate governance law. This article provides an insight into the law, along with its importance. Corporate governance law  describes how a company will be managed and governed. This topic is an important one for any student pursuing a degree in law. They may also receive academic papers to write on it. Hence, individuals should be clear about this law. The article aims at clarifying the idea behind the law and why it is important. What exactly is corporate governance law? A business is directed and controlled by the system of corporate governance. It is a process for governing a company, establishing the policies, customs, and laws for all employees, starting from the highest to the lowest levels. It states the distribution of responsibilities and rights among the various participants in a company like the di...