Speaker 1: Free audio post production.
Speaker 2: By Alphonic dot Com. We have an active shooter, we
Speaker 2: have an actor shoot.
Speaker 1: It's colleadings a mass casualty.
Speaker 3: Welcome to Active Shooter, a podcast that covers the wys,
Speaker 3: the hows, and the aftermath of active shooter and mass
Speaker 3: casualty events.
Speaker 2: They have an.
Speaker 3: Active shooter in the building. A second called AT's say
Speaker 3: our Big Cat show?
Speaker 2: What six nights? We got shot fire at four fifteen
Speaker 2: as broaching ninety one, So I'm like, Oh, I'm at.
Speaker 1: A fire, active shooter. Forts of an active shooter, active.
Speaker 2: Shooter, active shooter in mass casual incidents.
Speaker 3: Thank you for listening.
Speaker 4: You are listening to Active Shooter, a podcast that may
Speaker 4: contain adult themes, explicit language, and graphic depictions of violence.
Speaker 4: Portions of this show may be traumatic for those under eighteen.
Speaker 4: Listener discretion is advised.
Speaker 2: In the quiet moments before dawn or admidst the bustling
Speaker 2: energy of a school day, the unthinkable can shatter lives.
Speaker 2: Active shooter and mass casualty events leave indelible scars on individuals, families,
Speaker 2: and entire communities across the United States. While the statistics
Speaker 2: may seem abstract, a closer look reveals that behind every
Speaker 2: number lies a story of profound loss, resilience, and the
Speaker 2: urgent collective need for understanding and action. Today, we're going
Speaker 2: to do something a little different regarding active shooter. Today
Speaker 2: is not about one occurrence. Today is about out twenty
Speaker 2: twenty four. Today we are talking about the state of
Speaker 2: active shooter and mass casualty events in the United States
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty four. To truly grasp the scope of this,
Speaker 2: we have to navigate the terminology that shapes our understanding.
Speaker 2: The Federal Bureau of Investigation, or as we know it,
Speaker 2: the FBI, provides a foundational definition characterizing an active shooter
Speaker 2: as one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or
Speaker 2: attempting to kill people in a populated area, implicitly utilizing
Speaker 2: a firearm, which highlights the precious, often fleeting window for
Speaker 2: intervention and response. Complementing this, the FBI also defines a
Speaker 2: mass killing as an incident resulting in three or more
Speaker 2: killings in a single event, a critical distinction being that
Speaker 2: the shooter is explicitly excluded from these casualty counts when
Speaker 2: determining if an event meets this threshold. However, the conversation
Speaker 2: extends far beyond these specific FBI definitions, leading to a
Speaker 2: vital meta conversation about how we define and perceive the
Speaker 2: scale of gun violence in America. Other reputable organizations, such
Speaker 2: as the Gun Violence Archive GVA, employ broader criteria. GVA
Speaker 2: defines a mass shooting as a gun violence incident in
Speaker 2: which four more victims are injured or killed excluding the shooter.
Speaker 2: This wider lens, which encompasses injuries and addition to fatalities
Speaker 2: and sets a lower threshold for victim count, naturally results
Speaker 2: in a significantly higher number of reported incidents compared to
Speaker 2: the FBI's active shooter or mass killing definitions. This divergence
Speaker 2: in definition is not merely semantic. It profoundly influences public perception,
Speaker 2: policy debates, and the allocation of resources. Beyond firearm related incidents,
Speaker 2: the term mass casualty events encompasses any incident, regardless of cause,
Speaker 2: that results in a number of fatalities or injuries. This
Speaker 2: broader category includes natural disasters, which, as evidenced by data
Speaker 2: from the Emergency Events Database the MDAT, can lead to
Speaker 2: substantial loss of life and economic damage. There is a
Speaker 2: multifaceted challenge with public safety that extends beyond intentional acts
Speaker 2: of violence. In the face of such devastating events, accurate
Speaker 2: and consistently collected data is not merely a collection of numbers.
Speaker 2: It is the bedrock upon which effective prevention strategies are built,
Speaker 2: resources are judiciously allocated, and communities are protected. Without reliable,
Speaker 2: granular data, policy decisions risk being based on anecdote, speculation,
Speaker 2: or incomplete understanding rather than evidence. The FBI, through its
Speaker 2: annual Active Shooter Reports, plays an important role giving law enforcement,
Speaker 2: other first responders, private industry, and the public with critical
Speaker 2: data and understandings necessary to enhance their comprehension of these
Speaker 2: threats and to inform their preparedness efforts. The methodology employed
Speaker 2: by the FBI for its active shooter data collection is rigorous.
Speaker 2: It leverages extensive law enforcement partnerships and internal FBI holdings,
Speaker 2: supplemented by official law enforcement reports and open source data
Speaker 2: where centralized databases are absent. Importantly, the FBI's methodology also
Speaker 2: specifies explicit exclusions to ensure consistency and focus on particular
Speaker 2: types of incidents. Incidents primarily involving self defense, gang violence,
Speaker 2: drug related violence, residential or domestic disputes, barricade hostage situations,
Speaker 2: Shootings related to other criminal acts or crossfire as a
Speaker 2: byproduct of ongoing criminal activity are not included in their
Speaker 2: active shooter statistics. This precise scope allows for a focused
Speaker 2: analysis of specific types of incident, though, as I'll talk about,
Speaker 2: it also contributes to differences when compared with other organizations
Speaker 2: broader data sets, leading to a more complex overall picture
Speaker 2: of gun violence. The insights presented in this episode are
Speaker 2: primarily informed by the FBI's Active Shooter Incidents in the
Speaker 2: United States twenty twenty four report, which serves as the
Speaker 2: foundational document for understanding the specific dynamics of FBI defined
Speaker 2: active shooter events. This comprehensive document provides detailed statistics, temporal
Speaker 2: and geographical patterns, shooter profiles, and intervention outcomes for the
Speaker 2: year to provide you with a more complete perspective and
Speaker 2: to address the broader context of gun violence and mass
Speaker 2: casualty events. This report also includes information to other supplementary sources,
Speaker 2: including the Gun Violence Archive, which offers a wider lens
Speaker 2: of mass shootings than overall gun violence trends, including FETE
Speaker 2: and injuries using its distinct definition. Also, Every Town for
Speaker 2: Gun Safety contributes data on gun law rankings and the
Speaker 2: impact of policy changes, alongside specific statistics on gun related
Speaker 2: incidents on school grounds. The K through twelve School Shooting
Speaker 2: Database provides additional, more granular data on shooting incidents within
Speaker 2: educational environments. And Finally, the Emergency Events Database MDAT offers
Speaker 2: a global and national overview of natural hazard related incidents,
Speaker 2: providing context for mass casualty events beyond gun violence. And
Speaker 2: by pulling all of this information together, we the staff
Speaker 2: of Active Shooter aim to offer both a thorough and
Speaker 2: nuanced understanding of the state of active shooter and mass
Speaker 2: casualty events in twenty twenty four. In twenty twenty four,
Speaker 2: the FBI designated a total of twenty four active shooter
Speaker 2: incidents across the United States. These incidents collectively resulted in
Speaker 2: one hundred and six casualties, comprising twenty three individuals killed
Speaker 2: in eighty three wounded. These figures represent the FBI's specific
Speaker 2: categorization focusing on dynamic, ongoing events where individuals are actively
Speaker 2: engaged in killing or attempting to kill in populated areas. Now,
Speaker 2: when you compare twenty twenty four data, there are significant
Speaker 2: changes when viewed against previous years and longer historical trends.
Speaker 2: From twenty twenty three to twenty twenty four, there was
Speaker 2: a substantial year over year decline in active shooter incidents
Speaker 2: and casualties. The twenty four incidents in twenty twenty four
Speaker 2: represent a remarkable fifty percent decrease from the forty eight
Speaker 2: incidents recorded in twenty twenty three. Similarly, the one hundred
Speaker 2: and six casualties in twenty twenty four mark a fifty
Speaker 2: seven percent reduction from the two hundred and forty four
Speaker 2: casualties reported in twenty twenty three. This sharp decline is
Speaker 2: a positive development, There's no doubt about it, and it
Speaker 2: suggests that some prevention response efforts may actually be yielding
Speaker 2: tangible results. However, and you know there had to be. However,
Speaker 2: to fully appreciate the significance of this reduction, it is
Speaker 2: also important to place it within a broader historical context,
Speaker 2: looking beyond just the immediate prior year. Examining the five
Speaker 2: year period from twenty twenty to twenty twenty four, the
Speaker 2: FBI designated two hundred and twenty three active shooter incidents,
Speaker 2: which represents a seventy percent increase from the preceding five
Speaker 2: year period of twenty fifteen to twenty nineteen, which saw
Speaker 2: one hundred and thirty one incidents. Over this twenty twenty
Speaker 2: to twenty twenty four span, total casualties amounted to one thousand,
Speaker 2: seventy with three hundred and sixty nine killed and seven
Speaker 2: hundred and one wounded. While the twenty four incidents in
Speaker 2: twenty twenty four are considerably lower than the average of
Speaker 2: forty four point six incidents per year for the twenty
Speaker 2: twenty to twenty twenty four period, and the one hundred
Speaker 2: and six casualties in twenty twenty four fall below the
Speaker 2: five year average of two hundred four fourteen casualties per year.
Speaker 2: This recent decline it's really important to be seen in perspective.
Speaker 2: Extending this view to a twenty five year span twenty
Speaker 2: to twenty twenty four, a total of five hundred and
Speaker 2: fifty six active shooter incidents have been recorded, resulting in
Speaker 2: three thousand, nine hundred and twenty one casualties. That is,
Speaker 2: over fourteen hundred people killed and almost twenty five hundred
Speaker 2: people wounded, with an average of seven point one casualties
Speaker 2: per incident. Historical trends reveal a concerning escalation over time.
Speaker 2: The period from two thousand to twenty twelve, pre Sandy
Speaker 2: Hook averaged twelve point five incidents per year. This nearly
Speaker 2: doubled to an average of twenty four point two incidents
Speaker 2: per year from twenty thirteen to twenty nineteen, and then
Speaker 2: nearly doubled again to an average of forty four point
Speaker 2: six incidents per year from twenty nineteen to twenty twenty four.
Speaker 2: A critical observation from this comparison is that while the
Speaker 2: fifty percent reduction in active shooter incidents and fifty seven
Speaker 2: percent decrease in casualties from twenty three to twenty four
Speaker 2: is encouraging, it has to be put in context by
Speaker 2: using the broader historical information. The twenty four incidents recorded
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty four, while a sharp decline from recent peaks,
Speaker 2: are still on par with the average from twenty thirteen
Speaker 2: to twenty nineteen and nearly double the pre Sandy Hook average.
Speaker 2: This suggests that while twenty twenty four may represent a
Speaker 2: successful year for prevention and response efforts, it does not
Speaker 2: signify a return to the lower rates observed in the
Speaker 2: early two thousands. The underlying facts contributing to the post
Speaker 2: twenty twelve, increase may still be present, and sustained effort
Speaker 2: is required to maintain or further reduce these numbers. This
Speaker 2: calls for cautious optimism with a side of continued vigilance,
Speaker 2: rather than a declaration like we hear through multiple sources
Speaker 2: that the problem has been fully resolved. The challenge remains
Speaker 2: to understand which specific interventions contributed to this recent positive shift,
Speaker 2: in how to replicate and sustain them and build upon them.
Speaker 2: With the twenty four active shooter incidents designated by the
Speaker 2: FBI in twenty four, three, thirteen percent of the total
Speaker 2: met the federal definition for a mass killing incident. This
Speaker 2: is a substantial eighty percent decrease in mass killings from
Speaker 2: the fifteen incidents recorded in twenty twenty three. Over the
Speaker 2: five year period from twenty to twenty four, the average
Speaker 2: number of mass killings with an active shooter incidents was
Speaker 2: nine point six per year, with forty eight total incidents
Speaker 2: meeting this definition. Now, a massive challenge in interpreting these
Speaker 2: figures lay in the definitional discrepancies across various data sources.
Speaker 2: The FBI's narrow definition leads to a significantly lower reported
Speaker 2: number compared to broader definitions used by other organizations. For instance,
Speaker 2: the Gun Violence Archive reported four hundred and ninety nine
Speaker 2: mass shootings in twenty twenty four, defined as incidents where
Speaker 2: four or more victims were injured or killed excluding the shooter.
Speaker 2: This substantial difference in reported numbers, with the FBI identifying
Speaker 2: three mass killings versus the gva's four hundred and ninety
Speaker 2: nine mass shootings stems from the varying thresholds and criteria
Speaker 2: for inclusion. This inconsistency can lead to public confusion, misinterpretation
Speaker 2: of trends, and challenges in developing unified policy responses. There
Speaker 2: is a need for clear communication about the scope and
Speaker 2: limitations of different data sets to ensure that policymakers and
Speaker 2: the public draw accurate conclusions about the scale and nature
Speaker 2: of the problem. Without a common understanding of what constitutes
Speaker 2: a mass shooting or mass casualty event, efforts to track progress,
Speaker 2: allocate resources, and implement effective prevention strategies can become fragmented
Speaker 2: and less impactful. While statistics give us a macro view,
Speaker 2: the true impact of active shooter incidents, as you our
Speaker 2: listeners know, is felt most acutely in the individual stories
Speaker 2: of those affected. In twenty twenty four, several events stood
Speaker 2: out due to their tragic casualty counts, each leaving an
Speaker 2: indelible mark on the communities. Understanding these incidents on a
Speaker 2: more personal level, including the victim's experiences and the shooter's histories,
Speaker 2: offers critical insights into the human cost and the complex,
Speaker 2: often presentable pathways to violence. That is what we try
Speaker 2: to cover here on Active Shooter the Mad Butcher Number
Speaker 2: four oh six in Fordce, Arkansas. On Friday June twenty first,
Speaker 2: twenty twenty four, at approximately eleven thirty eight a m.
Speaker 2: The quiet routine of a supermarket in Ford Dice, Arkansas
Speaker 2: was shattered by an act of unimaginable violence. The shooter,
Speaker 2: a forty four year old man armed with a Mosburg
Speaker 2: twelve gage show shot gun and nine millimeters pistol, began
Speaker 2: his assault in the parking lot of the Mad Butcher's
Speaker 2: Supermarket near US Route seventy nine before moving inside the store,
Speaker 2: turning a place of everyday commerce into a scene of
Speaker 2: chaos and terror. The attack resulted in a devastating fourteen casualties.
Speaker 2: Four innocent people were killed, ten were wounded. Among those injured,
Speaker 2: were eight civilians and two dedicated law enforcement officers who
Speaker 2: responded to the unfolding crisis. When five officers from the
Speaker 2: Dallas County Sheriff's Office and Fordy's Police Department arrived, the
Speaker 2: shooter exited the store and engaged them in a shootout
Speaker 2: in the parking lot, a confrontation that ultimately led to
Speaker 2: his apprehension. The shooter, a resident of New Edinburgh, Arkansas,
Speaker 2: was known in the community as the owner of a
Speaker 2: landscaping and trucking service. While the specific motives of his
Speaker 2: actions are under investigation, his past includes a twenty eleven
Speaker 2: arrest for criminal possession of a weapon after at tennis
Speaker 2: to bring a firearm through the gates of Fort Drummond,
Speaker 2: New York. Appalachi High School in winder Georgio. Appalachi High
Speaker 2: School became the scene of a horrific tragedy on Wednesday,
Speaker 2: September fourth, twenty twenty four, at approximately ten twenty am,
Speaker 2: a fourteen year old freshman's student armed with a six
Speaker 2: hour M four hundred semi automatic rifle, which was AR
Speaker 2: fifteen styled, opened fire inside the school, transforming a place
Speaker 2: of learning into a battleground. The school was immediately placed
Speaker 2: on lockdown, and law enforcement responded with remarkable speed, arriving
Speaker 2: within minutes. The attack claimed the lives of four individuals,
Speaker 2: two students and two dedicated teachers, and left nine others wounded,
Speaker 2: including eight students and one teacher. This devastating incident marked
Speaker 2: the deadliest school shooting in George's history, sending shockwaves through
Speaker 2: the state and the nation. The shooter's motive is still
Speaker 2: under investigation, but a deeply disturbing history of concerning behaviors
Speaker 2: has emerged, painting a picture of a troubled young individual
Speaker 2: on a pathway to violence. His father allegedly purchased the
Speaker 2: rifle used in the attack as a Christmas gift for
Speaker 2: his son, despite having been previously warned by the Jackson
Speaker 2: County Sheriff's Office and FBI about the shooter's threats. He
Speaker 2: expressed a fascination the shooter did with other mass shooters
Speaker 2: and had documented homicidal and suicidal thoughts. He had been
Speaker 2: due to start therapy after previous false starts, and his
Speaker 2: family had a history of interactions with multiple child welfare workers,
Speaker 2: school systems, sheriff's departments, and police agencies, many of whom
Speaker 2: reportedly ignored or did not respond to reported concerns about
Speaker 2: child abuse. In a chilling document titled War against Humanity
Speaker 2: found at his home, the shooter described humanity as filth
Speaker 2: and detailed how he had obtained firearms through lies and
Speaker 2: manipulation and my father's stupidity. He had also engaged in
Speaker 2: online discussions about planning mass attacks and expressed profound feelings
Speaker 2: of alienation. On Saturday, June fifteenth, twenty twenty four, at
Speaker 2: approximately five eleven pm, a warm summer day at the
Speaker 2: Brooklyn's Plaza splash pad in Rochester Hills, Michigan, turned into
Speaker 2: a scene of unimaginable chaos and fear. The shooter, a
Speaker 2: forty two year old man, armed with two nine millimeter
Speaker 2: glock handguns, fired thirty six rounds into a crowd, targeting
Speaker 2: families and children. The attack wounded nine people, including two
Speaker 2: innocent children, forever altering their lives and the sense of
Speaker 2: safety in their community. Following the shooting, the shooter fled
Speaker 2: the scene and was later found dead from a self
Speaker 2: inflicted gunshot wound at his mother's home after a tense
Speaker 2: standoff with police. The shooter, an unemployed resident of Shelby, township.
Speaker 2: Had no prior cre criminal history, but was described by
Speaker 2: relatives and neighbors as a quiet and loner individual who
Speaker 2: privately struggled with significant mental health challenges, including paranoid delusions
Speaker 2: that the government was spying on him. While his specific
Speaker 2: motive remains undetermined, the discovery of an air style rifle
Speaker 2: on a kitchen countertop in his home led police to
Speaker 2: believe that he may have been preparing for a second,
Speaker 2: even more devastating attack, and we covered this in episode
Speaker 2: one seventeen of our podcast. The new school year began
Speaker 2: with tragedy on Thursday, January fourth, twenty twenty four, at
Speaker 2: approximately seven thirty five am, when Perry High School in Perry,
Speaker 2: Iowa became the target of a shooting. The shooter was
Speaker 2: a seventeen year old student armed with a shotgun and
Speaker 2: a handgun, and opened fire inside the school. The attack
Speaker 2: resulted in eight casualties. Two people were killed, a beloved
Speaker 2: faculty member and a young student, and six were wounded,
Speaker 2: including two faculty members, four students, and the school principal.
Speaker 2: The shooter died by suicide at the scene before law
Speaker 2: enforcement arrived. Investigators also located and rendered safe and improvised
Speaker 2: explosive device within the school. The shooter was described by
Speaker 2: friends and his mother as a quiet individual who had
Speaker 2: endured years of bullying. They speculated that the last straw
Speaker 2: might have been the school official's failure to intervene when
Speaker 2: his younger sister also began to be bullied. The investigation
Speaker 2: concluded that the shooter worked alone, driven by a desire
Speaker 2: to commit suicide with the hostile intent of taking others
Speaker 2: with him, and we covered this in episode one fourteen
Speaker 2: of our podcast. On Monday December sixteenth, twenty twenty four,
Speaker 2: at around ten fifty seven a m. The Abundant Life
Speaker 2: Christian School in Madison, Wisconsin experienced a devastating shooting. The shooter,
Speaker 2: a fifteen year old female student, armed with a handgun,
Speaker 2: began shooting individuals in seaside the school during a mixed
Speaker 2: grade study hall. The attack resulted in eight casualties. Two
Speaker 2: people were killed, a student and a staff member, and
Speaker 2: six were wounded, including five students and one teacher. The
Speaker 2: shooter died by suicide at the scene. Her history revealed
Speaker 2: a deeply troubled individual. She had a documented history of
Speaker 2: mental health issues, including suicidal threats and self cutting and
Speaker 2: had been enrolled in therapy. Police were investigating whether bullying
Speaker 2: played a role in her actions. The twenty four active
Speaker 2: shooter incidents in twenty twenty four were geographically dispersed across
Speaker 2: nineteen states, underscoring of the widespread nature of this threat
Speaker 2: across the nation. Texas experienced the highest frequency of incidents,
Speaker 2: with four occurrences. California and North Carolina each recorded two incidents.
Speaker 2: The remaining sixteen states Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana.
Speaker 2: In the Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Washington, Wisconsin,
Speaker 2: and Wyoming each reported one active shooter incident. When examining
Speaker 2: casualties by state, Arkansas registered the highest number, with fourteen
Speaker 2: resulting entirely from a single incident, highlighting that even a
Speaker 2: single event can have a disproportionately high human cost. Georgia
Speaker 2: followed with thirteen casualties, in Texas with eleven. Notably, Oklahoma
Speaker 2: and Tennessee each had one incident but reported no casualties.
Speaker 2: Incidents were distributed across various population densities. Six incidents occurred
Speaker 2: in locations with a population greater than five hundred thousand
Speaker 2: the largest share. Eight incidents occurred in areas with populations
Speaker 2: between ten and two hundred and fifty thousand, while four
Speaker 2: incidents were recorded in locations with populations between two hundred
Speaker 2: and fifty and five hundred thousand. Now, this diverse geographical
Speaker 2: and population distribution reinforces the notion that no community is
Speaker 2: immune and preparedness must be a universal priority. An examination
Speaker 2: of the temporal patterns of twenty twenty four active shooter
Speaker 2: incidents reveals distinct concentrations by month, day of the week,
Speaker 2: and time of day, offering potential insights for targeted prevention.
Speaker 2: A temporal pattern refers to a recurring sequence of events
Speaker 2: or behaviors that occur over time. In terms of monthly distribution,
Speaker 2: June recorded the highest number of incidents with five, followed
Speaker 2: by September with four. The months of March in October
Speaker 2: reported no active shooter incidents compared to twenty twenty three,
Speaker 2: September saw the most significant monthly increase in incidents from
Speaker 2: two to four, while April experienced the greatest decrease from
Speaker 2: seven to one. Now, analyzing the day of the week,
Speaker 2: Monday consistently registered the highest number of incidents with seven occurrences.
Speaker 2: Sunday and Tuesday had the lowest with only one. Thursday
Speaker 2: was the sole day that experienced an increase in incidents
Speaker 2: can compared to twenty twenty three from five to six,
Speaker 2: whereas Saturday saw the most substantial decrease from nine to two.
Speaker 2: Regarding the time of day, the period from six am
Speaker 2: to eleven fifty nine am accounted for the most incidents
Speaker 2: with nine occurrences. The broader twelve hour window from six
Speaker 2: am to five point fifty nine pm collectively represented the
Speaker 2: majority of the incidents, totaling fifteen or sixty two percent
Speaker 2: of all active shooter events in twenty twenty four. The
Speaker 2: observed concentrations of incidents on Mondays and during morning hours
Speaker 2: suggests potential underlying behavioral or situational drivers. This pattern could
Speaker 2: be linked to the start of the typical worker school week,
Speaker 2: periods of increased public activity or heightened individual stressors often
Speaker 2: associated with these routines. This clustering presents opportunities for targeted
Speaker 2: prevention and security measures. For example, increased law enforcement presence
Speaker 2: or public awareness campaigns encouraging vigilance and reporting could be
Speaker 2: strategically timed to maximize impact during these identified high risk periods.
Speaker 2: Understanding these temporal rhythms allows for a more efficient deployment
Speaker 2: of resources and proactive communication with the public. In twenty
Speaker 2: twenty four, active shooter incidents occurred across five of the
Speaker 2: seven location categories identified by the FBI. The open space
Speaker 2: category accounted for the largest population, with twelve incidents fifty
Speaker 2: percent of the total. Commerce and education each saw four
Speaker 2: incidents seventeen percent each, Government locations experienced three incidents thirteen percent,
Speaker 2: and house of worship locations had one incident totally to
Speaker 2: four percent. Notably, no active shooter incidents were reported in
Speaker 2: healthcare or residence categories in twenty twenty four. Per the
Speaker 2: FBI's definition. A significant trend observed over the past five
Speaker 2: years twenty twenty to twenty twenty four is that open
Speaker 2: space has emerged as the location category with the highest
Speaker 2: number of incidents, recording ninety two, which is forty one
Speaker 2: percent of the total, surpassing commerce locations which had eighty
Speaker 2: eight incidents. This shift in the primary location category presents
Speaker 2: a massive challenge for traditional security paradigms. Open spaces, by
Speaker 2: their very nature, are difficult to secure through conventional access
Speaker 2: controller physical barriers. This implies a dire need for evolving
Speaker 2: prevention and response strategies focusing more on community vigilance, public
Speaker 2: reporting mechanisms, rapid mobile law enforcement deployment, and potentially even
Speaker 2: urban design considerations to mitigate risks in these diffuse and
Speaker 2: accessible environments. The very openness that defines these spaces makes
Speaker 2: them inherently vulnerable to rapid, unpredictable attacks, demanding a reevaluation
Speaker 2: of how public safety is conceived and implemented in such settings.
Speaker 2: The distribution of casualties varied significantly across location category worries,
Speaker 2: highlighting the differing levels of lethality depending on the environment.
Speaker 2: In open space, these twelve incidents resulted in forty five casualties,
Speaker 2: three killed, forty two wounded, averaging four casualties per incident.
Speaker 2: Commerce the four incidents in commerce locations led to twenty
Speaker 2: three casualties eight killed, fifteen wounded, averaging six casualties per incident,
Speaker 2: despite having only four incidents. The education category recorded thirty
Speaker 2: one casualties eight killed, twenty three wounded, yielding the highest
Speaker 2: average of eight casualties per incident among all categories. This
Speaker 2: figure is well it's hard to hear as it underscores
Speaker 2: the extreme vulnerability of education environments, where the concentration of individuals,
Speaker 2: particularly children, can lead to devastating outcomes. Even in the
Speaker 2: limited number of reported incidents, the three incidents in government
Speaker 2: locations resulted in five casualties, four killed, one wounded, with
Speaker 2: an average of two casualties prints incident, and the single
Speaker 2: incident in a house of worship resulted into casualties zero killed,
Speaker 2: two wounded, averaging two per incident. Now, further breakdown within
Speaker 2: location categories does give us additional context, revealing the diverse
Speaker 2: settings where these tragedies unfold. Within open space, incidents occurred
Speaker 2: on roadways, in neighborhoods, in commercial areas, in parks, and
Speaker 2: in rural areas. Notably, five of these incidents took place
Speaker 2: across multiple locations, which complicates containment efforts and demanding a
Speaker 2: dynamic response. In commerce settings, incidents were equally split between
Speaker 2: businesses open to the public and those closed to the public.
Speaker 2: Three incidents occurred at small businesses and one at a
Speaker 2: large business or warehouse district, illustrating that varied commercial environments
Speaker 2: are at risk. And for education locations, two incidents occurred
Speaker 2: at private pre k through twelfth grade schools and two
Speaker 2: at public high schools. The data on incident duration and
Speaker 2: law enforcement response times, particularly in the education category, offers
Speaker 2: extremely important insights into the rapid and lethal nature of
Speaker 2: these events. For active shooter incidents in educational settings, the
Speaker 2: average law enforcement response time measured from dispatch to the
Speaker 2: arrival of the first responding officer was an exceptionally swift
Speaker 2: one minute in forty eight seconds. The average incident duration,
Speaker 2: defined as the time from the first shot fire to
Speaker 2: the resolution of the shooter, was three minutes in eighteen seconds.
Speaker 2: The fact that education settings, despite accounting for a smaller
Speaker 2: proportion of overall incidents, had the highest average number of
Speaker 2: casualties per incident is a sobering finding. This is significant
Speaker 2: given the extremely fast law enforcement response times and short
Speaker 2: incident durations we just spoke about, and this contrast means
Speaker 2: that these active shooter incidents prey on the extremely vulnerable
Speaker 2: and they are rapidly lethal. When it comes to those environments,
Speaker 2: there is a paramount importance of pre incident prevention, robust
Speaker 2: behavioral threat assessments, and comprehensive immediate action protocols for school
Speaker 2: staff and students, such as run Hide, fight training to
Speaker 2: mitigate initial casualties. The narrow window for intervention during these
Speaker 2: events means that efforts to identify and address potential threats
Speaker 2: before an attack begins are crucial to saving lives, as
Speaker 2: even the fastest response may not prevent initial devastation, which
Speaker 2: is why we hear an active shooter always end the
Speaker 2: show with if you see something, Say something. In twenty
Speaker 2: twenty four, these twenty four active shooter incidents involved a
Speaker 2: total of twenty five shooters. The demographic breakdown reveals the
Speaker 2: vast majority twenty two shooters, or eighty eight percent, were male,
Speaker 2: while three shooters twelve percent were female, a consistent pattern
Speaker 2: observed in previous years. The age range of the shooters
Speaker 2: spanned from fourteen to seventy three years old, demonstrating that
Speaker 2: perpetrators come from a wide spectrum of ages. The average
Speaker 2: age of shooters in twenty twenty four was thirty three,
Speaker 2: a slight decrease from thirty four in the year prior.
Speaker 2: Only four shooters were over the age of forty four.
Speaker 2: The thirty five to forty four age category accounted for
Speaker 2: most shooters with seven individuals, and the youngest shooter, aged fourteen,
Speaker 2: was involved. In an incident in an education setting, while
Speaker 2: the oldest age seventy three, was involved in a commerce incident.
Speaker 2: A significant characteristic identified in five incidents twenty one percent
Speaker 2: in total, was an insider threat connection. In these cases,
Speaker 2: there was an identified link between the shooter and the
Speaker 2: location and or at least one victim. These connections included
Speaker 2: current employees in two incidents and current students in three.
Speaker 2: The fact that twenty one percent of incidents involved in
Speaker 2: silt threats current employees or students highlights a specific and
Speaker 2: often complex vulnerability. Insider threats possess unique access, knowledge, and
Speaker 2: trust within an organization, making their detection and mitigation distinct
Speaker 2: from external threats. This implies that prevention strategies must be
Speaker 2: tailored to internal environments, focusing on fostering a culture of reporting,
Speaker 2: implementing employee and student well being programs, and establishing robust
Speaker 2: internal threat assessment protocols in addition to traditional physical security measures.
Speaker 2: Their intimate knowledge of the environment can allow them to
Speaker 2: bypass conventional security, necessitating a proactive internal approach that prioritizes
Speaker 2: the early detection of concerning behaviors among those with privileged access.
Speaker 2: Say it with me if you see something, say something.
Speaker 2: The FBI's Behavioral Analysis Unit one BAU one categor rise
Speaker 2: as active shooter incidents based on whether the shooters exhibited
Speaker 2: predatory behavior. This distinction is critical for understanding the nature
Speaker 2: of these attacks and informing prevention efforts because it highlights
Speaker 2: opportunities for intervention. Last year's shooters exhibited predatory behaviors, and
Speaker 2: fourteen of the twenty four incidents. These incidents accounted for
Speaker 2: a significant seventy seven percent of all casualties, totaling eighty
Speaker 2: two casualties, broken down as twenty killed and sixty two wounded.
Speaker 2: Predatory behavior refers to intentional acts when the perpetrator considers, plans,
Speaker 2: and prepares for the act of violence, often over a
Speaker 2: period of time. The average age shooters exhibit predatory behavior
Speaker 2: and I was twenty nine, with the twenty five to
Speaker 2: thirty four age category having the most shooters. Four In
Speaker 2: this group, five of these shooters were identified as insider threats,
Speaker 2: further emphasizing the planned nature of their attack. The resolution
Speaker 2: for these shooters included six nimes by suicide, five being apprehended,
Speaker 2: and three being killed by law enforcement. Alternatively, eleven shooters
Speaker 2: last year did not exhibit predatory behaviors at all, resulting
Speaker 2: in twenty three percent of the total casualties. These incidents
Speaker 2: are often characterized as more spontaneous or impulsive, arising from
Speaker 2: immediate emotional responses rather than premeditation. Of these shooters, nine
Speaker 2: were apprehended and two were killed by law enforcement. Now,
Speaker 2: the finding that fifty eight percent of incidents involved predatory
Speaker 2: behaviors strongly supports the emphasis on behavioral threat Assessment and
Speaker 2: Management BTAM. This indicates that a significant majority of the
Speaker 2: most impactful active shooter events are not random or spontaneous acts,
Speaker 2: but rather planned actions preceded by observable warning signs. This
Speaker 2: observation suggests that proactive identification and intervention based on these
Speaker 2: indicators represent a critical actionable pathway for preventing future attacks,
Speaker 2: shifting the focus from reactive response to proactive disruption. Investing
Speaker 2: in BTAM programs, public education on warning signs and accessible
Speaker 2: reporting mechanisms is therefore a highly effective strategy for mitigating
Speaker 2: these planned acts of violence, potentially savoring numerous lives by
Speaker 2: intervening before the violence can unfold. Now, research consistently indicates
Speaker 2: that individuals who commit mass shootings typically do not quote,
Speaker 2: just snap. Instead, they often spend time contemplating violence, and
Speaker 2: they plan, prepare, and frequently exhibit observable indicators before their attacks.
Speaker 2: Take a look at Columbine, they prepped for a year.
Speaker 2: Predatory behaviors provide crucial opportunities for disruption if recognized and reported.
Speaker 2: Studies have shown that prior to most mass attacks, concerning
Speaker 2: behaviors were observed by individuals such as friends, family, schoolmates, coworkers,
Speaker 2: or loved ones, those closest to the potential perpetrator. And
Speaker 2: you might be saying, that's great, JT. They saw something,
Speaker 2: but how do I know it that something is well?
Speaker 2: Common concerning behaviors that may indicate a person is moving
Speaker 2: towards violence include comments, jokes, or threats about violent plans,
Speaker 2: repeated or detailed fantasies about violence, comments about hurting themselves
Speaker 2: or others, creating documents, videos, or notes to explain or
Speaker 2: claim credit for future violence, seeing violence as a way
Speaker 2: to solve problems, unusual difficulty coping with stress, reduced interest
Speaker 2: in hobbies, worsening performance at school or work, increasing isolation,
Speaker 2: angry outbursts or physical aggression or hygiene, asking questions about
Speaker 2: testing security at a possible target, and changes in vocabulary
Speaker 2: or speech reflecting a hardened viewpoint. It is crucial, though,
Speaker 2: and paramount, to understand that no single behavior guarantees violence,
Speaker 2: but these, especially when combined with an inappropriate interest in weapons,
Speaker 2: significantly increases concern. The earlier these behaviors are noticed and reported,
Speaker 2: the more options are available for intervention and support, potentially
Speaker 2: diverting an individual from a destructive path altogether. Regarding mental health,
Speaker 2: the FBI's bau One clarifies that assessing the driving force
Speaker 2: behind an individual's decision to commit violence is more complex
Speaker 2: than simply diagnosing a mental health disorder. Their research on
Speaker 2: targeting violence and terrorism indicates that only twenty five percent
Speaker 2: of offenders had a diagnosable mental illness, a figure that
Speaker 2: roughly mirrors the prevalence in the general population. Bau One's
Speaker 2: research has not identified a causative connection between mental illness
Speaker 2: and targeted violence or terrorism. While not causative, mental illness
Speaker 2: can be a risk factor based on vulnerabilities that may
Speaker 2: lead to problematic behaviors or impaired judgment. Examples include schizophrenia,
Speaker 2: bipolar disorder, or major depressive disorder, as well as personality disorders.
Speaker 2: Substance abuse or use, and adjustment disorders. The FBI's explicit
Speaker 2: statement that mental illness is not a causative factor in
Speaker 2: targeted violence, but rather a potential risk factor, is a
Speaker 2: crucial point for public discourse. This distinction challenges common public
Speaker 2: misconceptions that often oversimplify the link between mental health and violence.
Speaker 2: The implication is that while supporting mental wellness is vital
Speaker 2: for overall societal health, focusing solely on mental illness as
Speaker 2: the root cause of active shooter events is an over
Speaker 2: simplification that can stigmatize individuals with mental health conditions and
Speaker 2: divert resources from other critical prevention strategies. Instead, a more
Speaker 2: effective approach involves focusing on concerning behaviors and impaired judgment,
Speaker 2: which can stem from various origins, not exclusively from a
Speaker 2: specific mental health diagnosis. This broader focus allows for more
Speaker 2: inclusive and effective intervention strategies that address the full spectrum
Speaker 2: of risk factors. In the twenty four active shooter incidents,
Speaker 2: a total of twenty nine firearms were utilized by the perpetrators.
Speaker 2: Handguns were the most prevalent type of firearm, accounting for
Speaker 2: seventeen of all weapons used. Reflecting their widespread availability and concealability.
Speaker 2: Rifles were the second most common used in nine incidents,
Speaker 2: followed by shotguns, which were used in three incidents. The
Speaker 2: number and type of firearms used had a direct correlation
Speaker 2: with the resulting casualties, highlighting the varying lethality of different
Speaker 2: weapon configurations. In twenty incidents, a single firearm was employed.
Speaker 2: These single firearm incidents resulted in seventy one total casualties,
Speaker 2: thirty six casualties when a single handgun was used, and
Speaker 2: thirty five casualties when a single rifle was used. In contrast,
Speaker 2: four incidents involved the use of multiple firearms. These incidents
Speaker 2: collectively resulted in thirty five casualties, demonstrating that while less frequent,
Speaker 2: the use of multiple weapons can significantly increase the destructive potential. Specifically,
Speaker 2: one incident involving two handguns led to nine casualties, Two
Speaker 2: incidents where a handgun and a shotgun were used resulted
Speaker 2: in twenty two casualties, and another incident involving two handguns
Speaker 2: and a shotgun caused four. A significant observation from this
Speaker 2: data is that while handguns are the most frequently used
Speaker 2: firearms in active shooter incidents, accounting for fifty nine percent
Speaker 2: of weapons. Rifles, despite being used less, often contribute to
Speaker 2: a comparable number of casualties. This highlights that while handgun
Speaker 2: violence is pervasive, rifles, when employed, possess a high capacity
Speaker 2: for mass casualties due to their rapid firing rate and
Speaker 2: increased lethality. This understanding is important for informing debates on
Speaker 2: weapon restrictions and for guiding tactical training for law enforcement.
Speaker 2: Emphasizing the distinct threat profiles posed by different firearm types,
Speaker 2: response strategies have to account for the potential for rapid
Speaker 2: escalation and casualty counts when rifles are involved, and prevention
Speaker 2: efforts must consider the types of weapons most likely to
Speaker 2: inflict mass harm. Last year, the use of improvised explosive
Speaker 2: devices IEDs in active shooter incidents was minimal, with only
Speaker 2: one incident involving the use or attempted use of such device.
Speaker 2: A notable and positive finding for response efforts was that
Speaker 2: none of the twenty five shooters in twenty twenty four
Speaker 2: were body armour. The absence of body armour last year
Speaker 2: and the minimal use of IEDs are noteworthy. While this
Speaker 2: trend is positive, for immediate response efforts in twenty twenty four,
Speaker 2: it cannot be assumed as a permanent shift. Historically, some
Speaker 2: high profile active shooters have utilized these elements, such as
Speaker 2: body armour to enhance their survivability against law enforcement or
Speaker 2: IEDs to amplify lethality and create additional chaos. This implies
Speaker 2: that while current data may not show widespread use, preparedness
Speaker 2: for such elements must remain a critical component of law
Speaker 2: enforcement training and tactical planning. Law enforcement engagement played a
Speaker 2: crucial role in the resolution of active shooter incidents. In
Speaker 2: twenty twenty four, six incidents involved in exchange of gunfire
Speaker 2: between law enforcement and the shooter. These engagements, while critical
Speaker 2: u for neutralizing threats, came at a cost to law enforcement,
Speaker 2: resulting in one officer killed and five wounded. In these
Speaker 2: six incidents where gunfire was exchanged, four shooters were killed,
Speaker 2: three at the scene and one at another location, and
Speaker 2: two were apprehended at the scene. The dynamics of these
Speaker 2: engagements varied, with five involving multiple law enforcement officers and
Speaker 2: one involving a loan officer, showcasing the varied circumstances of
Speaker 2: confrontation over the broader five year period from twenty twenty
Speaker 2: to twenty twenty four, fifty two incidents twenty three percent
Speaker 2: of the total involved law enforcement engagement, demonstrating a consistent
Speaker 2: pattern of direct intervention. It is important to note that
Speaker 2: a significant majority of incidents eighteen did not involve an
Speaker 2: exchange of gunfire with law enforcement. In these cases, twelve
Speaker 2: shooters were apprehended, six died by suicide, and one was
Speaker 2: killed by other means. A really important observation here is
Speaker 2: that in the twenty five five percent of incidents where
Speaker 2: law enforcement exchanged gunfire, a high proportion of shooters four
Speaker 2: out of six were neutralized or killed by law enforcement,
Speaker 2: and it shows that there's critical effectiveness of law enforcements
Speaker 2: direct intervention in stopping active threats and preventing further casualties. However,
Speaker 2: the sustained casualties among law enforcement officers one killed and
Speaker 2: five wounded in twenty twenty four, thirty six killed in
Speaker 2: one hundred and thirty two wounded over twenty five years
Speaker 2: shows the inherent and extreme danger faced by officers who
Speaker 2: willingly step into harm's way. This implies the continued necessity
Speaker 2: for advanced training specialized equipment and robust psychological support for
Speaker 2: law enforcement, recognizing their role as the ultimate line of defense. Furthermore,
Speaker 2: the fact that seventy five percent of active shooter incidents
Speaker 2: last year did not involve in exchange of gunfire with
Speaker 2: law enforcement is a significant finding. This suggests that many
Speaker 2: incidents resolved through other means, such as the shooter dying
Speaker 2: by suicide being apprehended without resistance fleeing. This rapid response
Speaker 2: is important not just for direct engagement, but for containment,
Speaker 2: casualty care, and swift apprehension even if a direct confrontation
Speaker 2: is avoided. It also further emphasizes the critical role of
Speaker 2: pre incident prevention and early detection in mitigating harm. Last year,
Speaker 2: only one active shooter incident involved intervention by security personnel,
Speaker 2: which highlights the relatively rare occurrence of such direct engagement
Speaker 2: by non sworn professionals. In the specific incident, there were
Speaker 2: no security casualties. The shooter was confronted by a security
Speaker 2: guard but managed to evade capture, eventually being apprehended by
Speaker 2: law enforcement at another location the following day. Over the
Speaker 2: broader five year period from twenty twenty to twenty twenty four,
Speaker 2: security personnel intervened in seven incidents, resulting in four security casualties,
Speaker 2: indicating those inherent risks. Again, Civilian intervention in active sh
Speaker 2: shooter incidents was rare in twenty twenty four, occurring in
Speaker 2: only one reported incident. Tragically, this intervention resulted in the
Speaker 2: death of the civilian who intervened, who was wounded and
Speaker 2: succumbed to his injuries ten days later. In this particular incident,
Speaker 2: the shooter died by suicide prior to law enforcement arrival.
Speaker 2: Over the five year period from twenty twenty to twenty
Speaker 2: twenty four, civilians intervened in twenty incidents, resulting in nine
Speaker 2: civilian casualties. There is immense personal risk involved in these
Speaker 2: albeit heroic acts. While civilian intervention, though rare, can be heroic,
Speaker 2: its outcome in twenty twenty four highlights the immense personal
Speaker 2: risk involved. This reinforces the run, hide, fight framework promoted
Speaker 2: by the FBI, where fight is presented as the last
Speaker 2: resort when no other options exist. This observation suggests that
Speaker 2: while empowering civilians with options for self preservation is important,
Speaker 2: the primary focus for public safety should remain on professional response.
Speaker 2: In more importantly, pre incident prevention and early warning. The
Speaker 2: goal should be to minimize situations where civilians are forced
Speaker 2: to confront active threats directly, thereby reducing the need for
Speaker 2: such high stakes heroism and prioritizing their safety through other means.
Speaker 2: Understanding the true scope of gun violence in the United
Speaker 2: States requires acknowledging the significant discrepancies in how various organizations
Speaker 2: define and report incidents. While the FBI's Active Shooter Report
Speaker 2: provides invaluable data on a specific type of event, it
Speaker 2: represents only a fraction of the broader landscape, and that
Speaker 2: definitional challenge again is a critical meta conversation that shapes
Speaker 2: public policy and perception. So for twenty twenty four, the
Speaker 2: FBI identified those twenty four active shooter incidents resulting in
Speaker 2: one hundred and six casualties. As mentioned. In contrast, the
Speaker 2: Gun Violence Archive GVA, which defines a mass shooting as
Speaker 2: an incident where at least four people are shot, injured,
Speaker 2: or killed excluding the shooter, reported a staggering four hundred
Speaker 2: and ninety nine mass shootings in twenty twenty four. These
Speaker 2: GVA defined incidents led not to one hundred and six
Speaker 2: casualties or twenty three fatalities these four hundred ninety nine
Speaker 2: mass shootings led to five hundred and seven fatalities in
Speaker 2: at least two thousand, one hundred and sixty nine injuries.
Speaker 2: This difference four hundred and ninety nine mass shootings by
Speaker 2: GVA versus three mass killings by the FBI is not
Speaker 2: a contradiction of facts, but rather a reflection of fundamentally
Speaker 2: different definitions and reporting criteria. F VBIS focuses on dynamic,
Speaker 2: ongoing events with intent to kill in populated areas, while
Speaker 2: GVA captures a broader range of incidents where multiple people
Speaker 2: are shot regardless of the specific context or intent. Now,
Speaker 2: this disparity extends to school related incidents as well. While
Speaker 2: the FBI's Shooter Report identified only four incidents in education settings,
Speaker 2: last year, the K through twelve School Shooting Database reported
Speaker 2: three hundred and thirty two shooting incidents at K through
Speaker 2: twelve schools, resulting in two hundred and sixty seven injuries
Speaker 2: and fatalities. Similarly, the every Town Support Fund reported at
Speaker 2: least one hundred and sixty gun related incidents on school
Speaker 2: grounds as of September thirtieth, twenty twenty four, which resulted
Speaker 2: in forty six deaths. And one hundred and six injuries nationally,
Speaker 2: surpassing their total for the year prior now. These numerical
Speaker 2: differences are not minor. They fundamentally shape public perception and
Speaker 2: policy debates. If we only consenter the FBI's active shooter numbers,
Speaker 2: the problem might appear smaller or more contained than it
Speaker 2: truly is. The broader data from GVA and school specific
Speaker 2: databases reveal a massive issue of gun violence that impacts
Speaker 2: communities daily, often outside the narrow scope of an active
Speaker 2: shooter event. There is a critical need for clear communication
Speaker 2: about the definitions used by various data sources to avoid
Speaker 2: misinterpretation and ensure a comprehensive understanding of the gun violence crisis.
Speaker 2: Without this clarity, efforts to track progress, allocate resources, and
Speaker 2: develop UNIFIDE prevention strategies can be severely hampered. Overall, the
Speaker 2: FBI's definition is narrow. It's valuable for tactical response in
Speaker 2: specific threat assessment, but it's a disservice if not properly contextualized.
Speaker 2: The disservice lies in the potential for these statistics to
Speaker 2: paint an incomplete picture. For instance, a domestic dispute that
Speaker 2: escalates into a shooting with multiple victims. While tragic and
Speaker 2: a mass casualty event, would not be counted as an
Speaker 2: active shooter incident by the FBI. Similarly, a gang related
Speaker 2: shootout in a public space that injures or kills several
Speaker 2: bystanders would also be excluded. These incidents, though not fitting
Speaker 2: the FBI's specific active shooter criteria, contribute significantly to the
Speaker 2: overall burden of gun violence and mass casualties in communities,
Speaker 2: often impacting vulnerable populations disproportionately. The implication is that relying
Speaker 2: solely on the FBI's active shooter data can lead to
Speaker 2: a false sense of security or misdirection of resources. If
Speaker 2: policy makers and the public believe that gun violence is
Speaker 2: declining based on one specific metric, they might overlook the
Speaker 2: persistent and devastating impact of other forms of firearm related
Speaker 2: violence that are not captured by this definition. A comprehensive
Speaker 2: approach to public safety requires acknowledging and addressing all forms
Speaker 2: of gun violence, not just those that fit a narrow,
Speaker 2: albeit important classification. This calls for a broader, more inclusive
Speaker 2: dialogue about how we measure, understand, and ultimately prevent all
Speaker 2: forms of gun related harm, ensuring that no community or
Speaker 2: type of violence is overlooked. Beyond gun violence, mass casualty
Speaker 2: events in the US last year also encompass significant natural disasters,
Speaker 2: highlighting a multifaceted nature of public safety challenges that demand different,
Speaker 2: yet equally critical preparedness and response frameworks. The Emergency Event
Speaker 2: Database m DAT reported three hundred and ninety three natural
Speaker 2: hazard related disasters globally in twenty twenty four, which resulted
Speaker 2: in sixteen thousand, seven hundred and fifty three fatalities. In
Speaker 2: the United States, preliminary estimates suggest just over one thousand
Speaker 2: deaths from extreme temperature events, though this figure is based
Speaker 2: only on data from Phoenix, Arizona, and Las Vegas, Nevada,
Speaker 2: indicating a potential for a much higher national toll. The
Speaker 2: US also experienced devastating tropical storms, including major hurricanes such
Speaker 2: as Helene, Milton, and Barrel, which incurred cumulative damage exceeding
Speaker 2: one hundred billion dollars. Additionally, a drought primarily affecting the southern, Eastern,
Speaker 2: and northwestern regions, resulted in an estimated loss of five
Speaker 2: point four billion dollars. These events, while distinct from gun violence,
Speaker 2: represent other significant forms of mass casualty incidents that required
Speaker 2: different preparedness and response frameworks. There has to be a
Speaker 2: holistic response, but one that is different for each situation.
Speaker 2: Broader trends and gun violence last year showed a complex picture,
Speaker 2: with some encouraging declines alongside persistent challenges. Gun desks declined
Speaker 2: for a third consecutive year, reaching its lowest number since
Speaker 2: twenty nineteen. It's a positive indicator of potential progress. Firearm
Speaker 2: injuries also saw a significant Firearm injuries also saw a
Speaker 2: significant decrease, falling by nearly fourteen percent from thirty six thousand,
Speaker 2: three hundred and thirty eight and twenty twenty three to
Speaker 2: thirty one thousand, four hundred and nine in twenty twenty four,
Speaker 2: suggesting a reduction in gun related harm barely. Homicides in
Speaker 2: major US cities plummeted at a record pace for the
Speaker 2: past two years, with many cities experiencing substantial drops. For instance,
Speaker 2: Philadelphia saw forty three percent decrease, in Washington, d C
Speaker 2: a thirty one percent decrease in homicides, so targeted interventions
Speaker 2: at a local level can yield significant results. The number
Speaker 2: of children and teenagers killed or wounded in shootings also
Speaker 2: saw a notable decline, plummeting by nearly seventeen percent compared
Speaker 2: to twenty twenty three. The numbers I'm about to give
Speaker 2: you for twenty twenty four are staggering, and despite them
Speaker 2: offering a glimmer a seventeen percent reduction glimmer of hope,
Speaker 2: five thousand, one hundred and fifty one children or teenagers
Speaker 2: were shot and just over one thousand, four hundred died.
Speaker 2: Not all trends were positive. Domestic violence incidents involving a
Speaker 2: gun increased by nine percent year to date, highlighting a
Speaker 2: specific area of escalating concern that requires urgent, targeted intervention
Speaker 2: and policy solutions. Gun sales continued their steady decline since
Speaker 2: twenty twenty, with thirteen point six million guns purchased in
Speaker 2: twenty twenty four, which which is a potential factor in
Speaker 2: the overall decline of gun violence. In terms of policy,
Speaker 2: twenty twenty four did see significant developments. The US Supreme
Speaker 2: Court upheld domestic violence gun restrictions in the United States
Speaker 2: verst Rahemi, a life saving ruling that reinforces protections for victims.
Speaker 2: Every Town for Gun Safety reported the passage of one
Speaker 2: hundred and seven life saving gun safety policies in various
Speaker 2: states and the successful defeat of two hundred and fifty
Speaker 2: four gun lobby backed bills, demonstrating a need for sustained advocacy.
Speaker 2: States like Michigan, Minnesota, Illinois, and Vermont improved their gun
Speaker 2: law rankings due to the enactment of strengthened background checks,
Speaker 2: extreme risk laws known as red flag laws, secure firearm
Speaker 2: storage laws, and assault weapons bans. Conversely, Florida's ranking worsened
Speaker 2: due to the passage of a permitless carry legislation, illustrating
Speaker 2: the divergent paths states are taking on gunpollloy This simultaneous
Speaker 2: decline in overall gun homicides and injuries with significant legislative
Speaker 2: activity in gun safety suggests a potential correlation between evidence
Speaker 2: based policy interventions and a reduction in certain forms of
Speaker 2: gun violence. While direct causation is complex and multifectorial, the
Speaker 2: timing and nature of these policy changes provide encouraging signals
Speaker 2: regarding the efficacy of legislative action. This indicates that continued
Speaker 2: legislative efforts, particularly those with proven efficacy like comprehensive background
Speaker 2: checks and extreme risk laws, are a viable and important
Speaker 2: component of a comprehensive violence reduction strategy working in concert
Speaker 2: with other prevention and response efforts. The significant decline in
Speaker 2: FBI defined active shooter incidents, particularly the fifty percent reduction
Speaker 2: from twenty twenty three, warrants careful consideration and offers a
Speaker 2: glimmer of hope amidst person challenges. The FBIS report itself
Speaker 2: suggests that various factors can influence whether an active shooter
Speaker 2: incident occurs, including prevention efforts, preparedness, behavioral threat assessments, and
Speaker 2: improved communication and engagement among law enforcement, families and communities.
Speaker 2: This observed decline is not merely a statistical anomaly, but
Speaker 2: potentially a reflection of concerted efforts. The emphasis on identifying
Speaker 2: and reporting predatory behaviors prior to attacks, which accounted for
Speaker 2: a majority of casualties, suggests that increased public awareness and
Speaker 2: successful interventions based on these indicators may be contributing to
Speaker 2: the observed decline an FBI defined active shooter events. There
Speaker 2: is a positive return on investment for proactive intelligence led
Speaker 2: prevention strategies when individuals in a potential perpetrator's orbit recognize
Speaker 2: concerning signs and report them. If you see something, say something,
Speaker 2: it creates opportunities for intervention before violence escalates. Continued investment
Speaker 2: in preparedness and response training such as the Advanced Law
Speaker 2: Enforcement Rapid Response Training Alert and the Active Shooter Attack
Speaker 2: Prevention and Preparedness ASAP programs promoted by the FBI also
Speaker 2: likely contribute to faster response times and better outcomes. So
Speaker 2: with all that information, do we have a plan? Well,
Speaker 2: we can have the components of a plan, the beginnings
Speaker 2: of a plan. Now we have a comprehensive action plan
Speaker 2: for reducing violence. The first steps prioritizing and expanding behavioral
Speaker 2: threat assessment and management programs. Given that a significant majority
Speaker 2: of high casualty incidents involve perpetrators exhibiting observable predatory behaviors,
Speaker 2: the proactive identification and intervention based on these indicators represent
Speaker 2: a critical pathway for prevention. So we need to increase
Speaker 2: federal and state funding for the establishment of BTAM programs
Speaker 2: in schools, workplaces, and community organizations. Develop standardized training curricula
Speaker 2: for teams, ensuring they are multidisciplinary involving law enforcement, mental
Speaker 2: health professionals, educators, and human resources personnel. We need to
Speaker 2: launch public awareness campaigns to educate communities on the warning
Speaker 2: signs of potential violence and provide clear, accessible and trusted
Speaker 2: pathways for reporting concerns, for instance, anonymous tip lines school
Speaker 2: safety apps. We also need to develop adaptive security strategies
Speaker 2: for diverse environments. The shift of incidents to open spaces
Speaker 2: and the persistent vulnerability of educational settings demand innovative and
Speaker 2: flexible security approaches beyond traditional hardening measures. We need to
Speaker 2: invest in research and development for security solutions tailored to open,
Speaker 2: diffuse environments, focusing on enhanced surveys, allens technologies, rapid mobile
Speaker 2: law enforcement deployment, and community based vigilance networks. We need
Speaker 2: to implement comprehensive run hide, fight training programs for civilians
Speaker 2: in all public and private settings, emphasizing that fight is
Speaker 2: a last resort when no other options exist. These programs
Speaker 2: should be regularly updated and widely disseminated, and we need
Speaker 2: to enhance physical security measures in educational and other vulnerable
Speaker 2: fixed locations, including controlled access points, reinforced doors, and integrated
Speaker 2: communication systems, while ensuring these measures do not create an
Speaker 2: unwelcoming or overly restrictive environment. We need to strengthen support
Speaker 2: and training for first responders law enforcement and other First
Speaker 2: responders are the ultimate line of defense, often facing extreme danger,
Speaker 2: their effectiveness is paramount to mitigating casualties. We should ensure
Speaker 2: continuous advanced tactical training for law enforcement, such as alert
Speaker 2: program focusing on rapid threat neutralization, casualty care and multi
Speaker 2: agency coordination. Provide robust and accessible mental health and wellness
Speaker 2: support programs for first responders. Acknowledging the profound psychological toll
Speaker 2: of responding to mass casualty events, we should invest in
Speaker 2: specialized equipment and technology that enhances first responder capabilities, including
Speaker 2: communications systems, protective gear, tools for managing complex incident scenes.
Speaker 2: Then we need to promote data harmonization and evidence based policy.
Speaker 2: The discrepancies in how gun violence is defined and reported
Speaker 2: they hinder a comprehensive understanding and effective policy response. We
Speaker 2: need to initiate a national dialogue among federal agencies, research organizations,
Speaker 2: and advocacy groups to work towards greater standardization of definitions
Speaker 2: for gun violence incidents, or at least clear our two
Speaker 2: of definitional differences and their implications. We should advocate for
Speaker 2: and implement evidence based gun safety policies that have demonstrated
Speaker 2: efficacy in reducing gun violence, such as universal background checks,
Speaker 2: extreme risk protection orders, and secure firearm storage laws. We
Speaker 2: need to support research into the long term impacts of
Speaker 2: various gun safety policies and prevention programs to continuously refine
Speaker 2: strategies based on empirical evidence. Finally, we need to foster
Speaker 2: a culture of holistic violence prevention. Recognizing that violent stems
Speaker 2: from a complex interplay of factors, a holistic approach is essential.
Speaker 2: We should increase access to comprehensive mental health SCARE services
Speaker 2: and substance abuse treatment, addressing vulnerabilities that can contribute to
Speaker 2: problematic behaviors and impair judgment without stigmatizing mental illness as
Speaker 2: a direct cause of violence. We should invest in community
Speaker 2: led violence intervention programs that address root causes of violence,
Speaker 2: such as poverty, lack of opportunity, and systematic inequities, fostering
Speaker 2: resilience and positive community engagement. Finally, we need to prompt
Speaker 2: responsible gun ownership practices. This includes secure storage and education
Speaker 2: on the risks associated with firearms to prevent accidental shootings
Speaker 2: and reduce access for individuals who may pose a threat.
Speaker 2: It's safe to say the year twenty twenty four offers
Speaker 2: a complex yet ultimately hopeful narrative regarding active shooter and
Speaker 2: mass casualty events in the United States. While the significant
Speaker 2: klein An FBI defined active shooter incidents from twenty twenty
Speaker 2: three as a testament to the potential effectiveness of proactive
Speaker 2: prevention efforts, particularly those focused on identifying intervening and predatory behaviors,
Speaker 2: we must not mistake this process for a complete victory.
Speaker 2: The data also reveals a persistent and pervasive challenge of
Speaker 2: broader gun violence, with hundreds of mass shootings and an
Speaker 2: increase in gun related incidents on school grounds still casting
Speaker 2: a long shadow. The shift of these devastating events into
Speaker 2: open spaces further emphasizes the evolving nature of the threat,
Speaker 2: which demands our constant vigilance and adaptation. Behind every statistic
Speaker 2: that I've mentioned in this episode, our lives irrevocably altered.
Speaker 2: The victims, the survivors, the first responders who bravely step
Speaker 2: into harm's way, and the communities left to heal. Their
Speaker 2: stories are a powerful reminder that this is not merely
Speaker 2: an academic exercise. It is a profound human challenge that
Speaker 2: demands our collective empathy and unwavering commitment. We have seen
Speaker 2: that early intervention rooted in recognizing concerning behaviors can disrupt
Speaker 2: the pathway to violence. This is where each of us
Speaker 2: holds that vital role. We must foster communities where individuals
Speaker 2: feel empowered and safe to report concerns, where mental health
Speaker 2: support is readily accessible, and where this stigma often associated
Speaker 2: with seeking help is dismantled. It is a call to
Speaker 2: look out for one another, to listen, and to act
Speaker 2: with compassion and courage. For our leaders and policy makers,
Speaker 2: the path forward is clear. Sustained investment in evidence based
Speaker 2: prevention programs, adaptive security strategies for our diverse environments, and
Speaker 2: unwavering support for our first responders are not options, but necessities.
Speaker 2: We must also engage in an honest and open dialogue
Speaker 2: about the nuances of gun violence, data working towards greater
Speaker 2: clarity and consistency in how we define and measure these tragedies.
Speaker 2: This will enable us to allocate resources effectively and build
Speaker 2: a national strategy that is truly comprehensive. The journey towards
Speaker 2: a safer society is not easy. It is long and arduous,
Speaker 2: but it is a journey we must embark on together.
Speaker 2: It requires not just policy changes and tactical responses, but
Speaker 2: a fundamental shift in how we perceive and address the
Speaker 2: vulnerabilities within our communities. Let the data from twenty twenty
Speaker 2: four serve not as the final word, but as a
Speaker 2: powerful impetus for continued research, innovation, and most importantly, a
Speaker 2: renewed commitment to protecting every life. Let us honor those
Speaker 2: we have lost by dedicating ourselves preventing future strategies, building
Speaker 2: communities where safety is a shared reality, and ensuring that hope,
Speaker 2: not fear, defines our future. That brings us to the
Speaker 2: close of this very different and very special episode of
Speaker 2: Active Shooter the Podcast. Remember your vigilance can be a lifeline.
Speaker 2: Say it with me. If you see something, say something,
Speaker 2: There's truly no telling how many lives you might save.
Speaker 2: Don't forget to connect with us on social media. You
Speaker 2: can find us on Facebook at Active Shooter the Podcast
Speaker 2: and on x at podcast Active. Stay safe out there,
Speaker 2: and thank you for listening.
Speaker 3: Thank you for listening to today's episode of Active Shooter
Speaker 3: the Podcast. Remember, if you see something, say something, there's
Speaker 3: no telling how many lives you may be saving. A
Speaker 3: big thank you to Darren Curtis, who composed some of
Speaker 3: the songs on our show. You can find him online
Speaker 3: at www dot Darren Curtis music dot com. Make sure
Speaker 3: to check us out on social media. You can find
Speaker 3: us on Facebook at Active Shooter the Podcast and on
Speaker 3: Twitter at podcast Active. Thank you and be safe.
Speaker 1: Free audio post production
Speaker 2: Byolphonic dot com.