Harming animals and massacring humans: Characteristics of public mass and active shooters who abused animals

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 739-751 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnold Arluke ◽  
Adam Lankford ◽  
Eric Madfis
Keyword(s):  
Active Shooters

(In)action: Variation in bystander responses between persons of concern and active shooters.

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 113-121
Author(s):  
Sarah W. Craun ◽  
Karie A. Gibson ◽  
Amanda G. Ford ◽  
Kristen Solik ◽  
James Silver
Keyword(s):  
Active Shooters

Are the Deadliest Mass Shootings Preventable? An Assessment of Leakage, Information Reported to Law Enforcement, and Firearms Acquisition Prior to Attacks in the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 315-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Lankford ◽  
Krista Grace Adkins ◽  
Eric Madfis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Warning Signs ◽  
Federal Bureau ◽  
Specific Interest ◽  
Mass Shootings ◽  
The Public ◽  
Active Shooters ◽  
Mass Shooting

This study examined the 15 deadliest public mass shootings in the United States from March 1998 to February 2018 to assess (a) leakage of violent thoughts/intent, (b) leakage of specific interest in mass killing, (c) concerning behaviors reported to law enforcement, (d) concerning interest in homicide reported to law enforcement, and (e) firearms acquisition. We then compared our findings on the deadliest public mass shooters with the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) findings on active shooters in general. Overall, the results suggest that most incidents were indeed preventable based on information known about offenders in advance, and that the deadliest mass shooters exhibited more warning signs and were more often reported to law enforcement than other active shooters. Future prevention efforts should aim to educate, encourage, and pressure the public to report warning signs to law enforcement, educate and train law enforcement so that they can more effectively investigate potential threats, and limit firearms access for people who have admitted having homicidal or suicidal thoughts or being interested in committing a mass shooting. These relatively straightforward steps could significantly reduce the prevalence of future attacks.

Active Shooters in Health Care Settings: Prevention and Response through Law and Policy

2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 268-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
James G. Hodge ◽  
Kellie Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Critical Event ◽  
Johns Hopkins Hospital ◽  
Health Care Settings ◽  
Active Shooters ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Academic Hospitals ◽  
Tragic Event ◽  
National Expert

In September 2010 at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, one of the nation's elite academic hospitals located in East Baltimore, Maryland, Paul Warren Pardus entered the facility to visit his mother, a patient. During a discussion with her doctor in a hospital hallway, Pardus became “overwhelmed” about the care and condition of his mother, pulled a handgun from his waistband, and shot the doctor in the chest. Pardus then locked himself and his mother in her room, shot and killed her, and committed suicide.Dr. Gabe Kelen, a national expert on emergency preparedness and director of the Johns Hopkins emergency department, admitted several years later that this tragic event “really got us thinking in a very serious way.” Together with colleagues at the Johns Hopkins Office of Critical Event Preparedness and Response (CEPAR), Kelen conducted research on the threat and impact of “active shooters” in health care settings.

Predicting Active Shooter Events: Are Regional Homogeneity, Intolerance, Dull Lives, and More Guns Enough Deterrence?

2018 ◽  
Vol 65 (9) ◽  
pp. 1218-1261
Author(s):  
Richard B. Duque ◽  
E.J. LeBlanc ◽  
Robert Rivera
Keyword(s):  
Diversity Training ◽  
General Social Survey ◽  
The United States ◽  
Regional Homogeneity ◽  
Control Measures ◽  
Active Shooter ◽  
Gun Ownership ◽  
Active Shooters ◽  
White Males ◽  
Per Capita

Based upon a secondary analysis of 2016 General Social Survey (GSS) data, this study identifies regional “Heterogeneity”, “Tolerance”, “Life is Exciting”, “Lack of Confidence in Institutions” and “Gun Ownership” effects related to the frequency of Active Shooter events, which occured in the United States between 2000 to 2016. For Education Active Shooters, regional homogeneity is related to more tragic events as is less gun ownership per capita. For Workplace Active Shooters, more gun ownership per capita is associated with more events as is regional diversity and tolerance. The findings support calls for arming schools in white, affluent neighborhoods as well as more aggressively profiling, arresting and convicting potential White perpetrators in order to reduce the risk of Education Active Shooters. Meanwhile, stronger gun control measures in diverse and tolerant regions might reduce the incidents of Workplace Active Shooter events. The findings also suggest that organizations should acquire digital “Human Analytics” platforms and programs that integrate internal member profiles, conflict incident reports and culture climate data along with relevant regional and national data like that analyzed in this paper to help alert them to their dynamic Active Shooter risk. Also, re-evaluating diversity training seminars and courses, which often cast teen and middle-aged, White males as historical “villains”, might help address the chronic strain this population experiences at school and at work. Finally, re-evaluating how disassociated White males are treated, as well as expelled/fired from school or work, might also help defuse the “popcorn effect”associated with these tragic events.

A Look at Solutions to Active Shooters

2020 ◽  
pp. 133-137
Author(s):  
Lawrence J. Fennelly ◽  
Marianna A. Perry ◽  
Thomas Norman
Keyword(s):  
Active Shooters

Rhetorical Dimensions of “Active Shooter” Training Messages

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley A. Serber ◽  
Rosa A. Eberly
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Mental Health Professionals ◽  
The United States ◽  
Active Shooter ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
University Campuses ◽  
Active Shooters ◽  
Design Function ◽  
Active Shootings

Mass public shootings in the United States have generated increasingly urgent efforts to understand and prevent active shooter scenarios. After the Columbine High School shooting in 1999, government officials tried to no avail to identify a demographic profile of those who might become active shooters. Confronted with the limitations of identifying potential shooters in advance, government officials, mental health professionals, criminologists, and others interested in preventing active shootings have shifted their focus to guns, mental health, and location security. However, the terrain of each of these topics is murky and exposes additional uncertainties. The sheer number of readily available guns, the prohibition of gun violence research by federal public health and justice institutions, and the variance in attitudes toward and laws about guns in the United States inhibit clear and consistent gun policy. Further, linking active shooters with mental illness risks stigmatizing the vast majority of mentally ill individuals who are more likely to be victims than perpetrators of violence. Because different locations vary in design, function, funding, resources, and vulnerabilities, no organization or institution can guarantee total security despite extensive and costly efforts. While political and social changes can lead to incremental and important improvements in each of these areas, the problem of active shootings is large, multifaceted, and evolving. Adding to the urgency is the increasing number of U.S. states voting to allow concealed and/or open carry of firearms on public college and university campuses. In the absence of certainty and in recognition of contextual differences, government agencies and educational institutions recently have promoted variants of a “run, hide, fight” approach to active shooter situations, and many schools, workplaces, and other sites have subsequently adopted these tactics in their active shooter training messages. From a rhetorical perspective, pentadic analysis (Burke, 1969) of “run, hide, fight” and its variants reveals the complexities of trying to prevent active shootings. “Run” and “hide” demonstrate both the possibilities and challenges associated with the scene, or when and where an active shooting might occur. “Fight” implies the ambiguities of agent and agency, that is, who gets to fight and how, in debates about gun-free zones, concealed and open carry, and on-site and off-site law enforcement. Meanwhile, the multimodal nature and often disturbing content of active shooter training messages sensationalize the act of active shootings, making them seem more real and present despite the low probability of such an event occurring in any particular place at any particular time. Given these complexities, active shooter training messages as a whole illustrate a tension of purpose in that they presumably attempt to alleviate fear while simultaneously producing it. By looking at a variety of government documents and workplace active shooter training messages, this analysis will explore uncertainties, controversies, and lingering questions about the content and consequences of active shooter training messages and how the producers of these messages frame active shooter scenarios as well as efforts to prevent and respond to such occurrences. No previous studies of the rhetorical or communication dimensions of active shooter training have been conducted, and no archives yet exist that cull such training materials for purposes of comparison, contrast, and analysis in the aggregate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document