It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Active shooter dry-runs?

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   
First: I have nothing to support the theory other than my own experience and its lead to a question:

With two reports of shots fired/active shooters in a week, and both turning out to be erroneous reports, am I the only one wondering if these are potentially testing the response of authorities? Or is it simply a case of people being on edge?

Example: I see a lot of organized retail crime (huge industry, believe it or not. People can make a living, or support a drug habit, by boosting high value merchandise and selling it) in my area and one thing we see a lot of times is the crew will pull off a small theft and then gauge the reaction of store employees, loss prevention, and law enforcement. They'll use alarmed fire exits and then wait to see how the alarm is responded to. They'll run out the front doors and then watch to see what happens. Bank robbers (guys who could be called professional, anyway) do the same thing: visit a bank a few times, see the layout, look for guards, etc.

So - am I the only one wondering if there's something more to this than a couple of nervous Nellies?




posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
First: I have nothing to support the theory other than my own experience and its lead to a question:

With two reports of shots fired/active shooters in a week, and both turning out to be erroneous reports, am I the only one wondering if these are potentially testing the response of authorities? Or is it simply a case of people being on edge?

Example: I see a lot of organized retail crime (huge industry, believe it or not. People can make a living, or support a drug habit, by boosting high value merchandise and selling it) in my area and one thing we see a lot of times is the crew will pull off a small theft and then gauge the reaction of store employees, loss prevention, and law enforcement. They'll use alarmed fire exits and then wait to see how the alarm is responded to. They'll run out the front doors and then watch to see what happens. Bank robbers (guys who could be called professional, anyway) do the same thing: visit a bank a few times, see the layout, look for guards, etc.

So - am I the only one wondering if there's something more to this than a couple of nervous Nellies?


Could be. Were they able to identify the person that called the shots in, in both cases? I would think that if they were testing then the person calling in would have to be in on it. If there was an actual shot fired, they could have fired it and hidden quickly to watch.



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

It certainly makes ya wonder.

I honestly don't know what to think and have many questions on these deals.

For starters, why aren't the people who report these false claims not held liable? The man power alone is quite costly to respond to these incidents. I know if I shouted "fire" in a crowded theater, I'd be in trouble. Fake 911 calls have repercussions. Why do these cases simply disappear?



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Controlled Exercises.

For data gathering.




posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

I think you're on to something. However, I don't think it's a dry run for the locations that the erroneous reports were made. I do see the possibility that these calls are being made to gauge not only response times, but how they respond. As in, how many officers respond to the location, and how many officers are on reserve for other incidents that may take place.

To best describe my theory, I give this example:

Person calls in to report an active shooter at location A. Person then calls in to report an active shooter at Location B. Person is actually at location C and begins while 95% of the police department is tied up at locations A and B.



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

You and Kaw - I don't know if they've identified anybody so far. As you said, the cases disappear from the media pretty quick. The one at Walter Reed is just now wrapping up though so it's probably way too early to tell who it was so far.

I would be interested to know whether the calls are initiated internally or externally? As in, is somebody calling from a desk phone or is the call received from a pay phone? Mobile?

@ eternal - exactly. How long does it take for a crapload of people to show up at location A? That's how long we'll wait to hit location B.

@ X - I'll entertain the idea since this is skunk works, but I don't think it's very likely



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   
I was thinking it might be our own military doing this to test out how well or how bad the reaction is at these locations. If a bad reaction took place they could make corrections. On the other hand it might be terrorist cells trying learn how the reactions take place.

a reply to: Shamrock6



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

This is something else I just thought of. Since calls are prioritized, it could even be a way to test out that prioritization. Obviously an active shooter situation will take precedence over a break in. So these folks could call in or stage a couple of active shooter situations as subterfuge for hitting a bank or jewelry store.



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

I gave you a star and flag, but I'm disappointed you didn't tie in Jade Helm!



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: bucsarg

From personal experience, somebody always knows it's a drill. The worker bees may not, or if they do they may not have specific details, but somebody higher up always knows.

The high degree of publicity for each event leads me to think it's likely not a drill.

Can't discount it, but I don't think the odds point to that.



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: KawRider9

I'm in court. Gimme time, I'll figure something out.




posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: EternalSolace

Excellent angle. Let's not forget both recent events are federal buildings, too. And relatively near each other. (Not down the block from each other but not terribly far either)



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

You hit the nail on the head regarding the testing of responses etc in retail stores.

As someone who worked loss prevention for a while, I've busted a few organized fraud rings and damn near got #ed up a number of times chasing people down and struggling to get them under arrest..these days your not supposed to do that and rightfully so.

We were cowboys in our own right lol & all I had were my bare hands to work with..good times.



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Possibly maybe even probable but people do freaked out easily. We can think to ourselves or even boast about not being afraid of the latest xyz but when you're out there alone or worse with your kid... suddenly every out of the ordinary thing is a potential threat and all your senses go on alert.

In these mistaken incidents it could easily be someone aware of an altercation but can't see it then hearing something crash to the floor. In which case better to be safe than sorry.



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Yea, can't discount that at all. Especially with the "heightened" terror threat for the last week or so.

Somebody is already a bit jumpy and hears a slammed door, dropped light bulb, etc....



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 02:23 PM
link   
I definitely think you're onto something. Just who is doing the testing?

A lil while ago, there was bomb threat called into the White House and reporters had to leave mid-briefing. Remember that? There was also some kinda threat made to a plane from Europe? to the US. I don't remember what kinda threat. It was recent.

I remember specifically during the Navy Yard incident, CNN was saying that it was a woman that called in & police were talking to her. The lady that had called in had been in the first shooting there.

Interesting.



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: nerdyclutzyblonde

Oooo. Great find. I hadn't heard anything about the Feds talking to anybody after the navy yard. Thanks for the update.

If she was present for the first shooting, it lends credence to possibly just being jumpy.

Dammit



posted on Jul, 6 2015 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

I absolutely believe the waters are being tested.

Matter of fact, in my city we have verified that drug dealers will call in shots fired in area A to get officers to respond there.

They then move their drugs, money, guns, etc. from area B more easily as we are distracted.

To remain anonymous they either call from a burner phone, one of the few pay phones that still exist, or they call in on an administrative line where there is no caller ID (like 911).

If street level drug dealers are doing this, I can only imagine who else is.

Oh and....








JADE HELM!
edit on 6-7-2015 by torqueythepig because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
8

log in

join