Las Vegas - Mandalay Bay Shooting

[ship]

SOP I hope coming in training for all in the center of the audience controlling the show. I hear a sound person probably at this location took over over stage monitors thru TV coverage. That's a really good initial thing to do in getting the talent off stage.

I hear stage lights and area lights came up to full at some point not specified. That could be a good or bad thing also as with going black in lighting also a bad thing.

The people in the tent at the center audience control of the show I would doubt run and wouldn't run as opposed to doing their job and most worried for in staying at their position and dowing their job. I think need a SOP as to what to do. Turn off the lights, and the audience is in the dark. Put the lights on at full, it better lights up the situation to get the audience out.

This is I think some debate and training thing to work on for SOP. That the sound person while under fire told the talet to get off stage, was a fairly brave person to do so as opposed to running out of the expected center location in the audience.

 

[Van]

Two of my now married HS friends are both based there. Luckily he was out on the road... and she is in her residency in emergency medicine at University Medical Center in Vegas. She was finally able to post later today and has basically been working ever since this happened.

So, with that... I think it it totally possible to say that post 9/11 more people have been killed or injured attending concerts or other mass gatherings then have been killed by acts of terror in the skys. So, why are we paying 7.5 billion for TSA and leaving venue security up to the promoters whims and some 22 year kid in a security shirt?

In what way would highly trained Venue security personnel have been able to prevent or limit the damage done by a shooter who was across the street and several floors up firing indiscriminately into a crowd? Shall we encase every outdoor venue in a Poly carbonate dome? How bout we give all the rent-a-cops grenades and riot guns?
I agree Venue security needs to be more than a high school drop out with a t-shirt, so they can deal with actual security events, but as far as How can we deal with this? I Think as Production Professionals all we CAN do is follow the advice of so many out there, "If you see something say something". Venue and Production companies need to stress that in an active shooter situation the backstage and venue personnel are literally the first line of defense. There needs to be, and it needs to be gone over with everyone in the venue, evacuation plans, emergency response chains of command (when I see something where/whom do I go to?) I don't think making the 'Ultimate sacrifice' needs to be a part of a stagehands job description but I am reminded of the Iraqi who literally hugged a suicide bomber confining the blast and helping save hundreds during an attack on a Mosque, and the guy who approached the bomber at the London concert who also sheilded many from the blast.
It's stupid/heartbreaking/infuriating/dumbfounding that we have to have these conversations.

 

[sk8rsdad]

The sort of training that would be generally useful for the security team at large events is crowd management. That's the job for any other disturbance that panics the audience. There's no expectation that the security team would stand in front of an oncoming tornado so there should be no expectation that they would engage a terrorist. There's a reasonable expectation that a coordinated evacuation or shelter in place action could reduce harm.

The rest of the production team should be trained to do whatever is the most accepted response to minimize the audience causing even more harm to each other. In most cases that probably involves turning down the distractions and turning up the "house" lights, but will defer to the experts in crowd management.

I share @Van's sentiments about these conversations.

 

[Aaron Clarke]

I don't know about you but I've found the media coverage really disjointed and at times difficult to just get the latest details.

I was just discussing this yesterday. Sadly most media tends to report just what ever speculation anyone will say in front of a camera and call themselves an "expert". I get it, how else do you fill the multitude of 24/7 news channels with content while the real experts actually conduct an investigation. I was really sadden to see that NPR has resorted to having to place a disclaimer explaining what real news is versus what most the outlets provide:

"This is a developing story. Some things that get reported by the media will later turn out to be wrong. We will focus on reports from police officials and other authorities, credible news outlets and reporters who are at the scene."

Of course, I'm happy to see that the forum members, families and families in sprit are safe and sound as hope we hear no news otherwise. Thoughts and prayers to all this affected and I really hope there is a day we don't have to try and explain these types of events to little kids.

 

[gafftaper]

So, with that... I think it it totally possible to say that post 9/11 more people have been killed or injured attending concerts or other mass gatherings then have been killed by acts of terror in the skys. So, why are we paying 7.5 billion for TSA and leaving venue security up to the promoters whims and some 22 year kid in a security shirt?

On 9/10 no one thought a box cutter was a danger on an airplane. Today we think differently and security has changed.

Last week we didn't think holding an event 400 yards from a tall hotel was a danger. Today we have to start thinking differently and change venue security. That said, without the US Military's best Sniper on hand to return fire (with a really lucky shot) there wasn't much we could have done to stop this. Do we need better hotel security? Acrylic shields over outdoor venues? Move outdoor events away from tall buildings? There are a LOT of questions and no good answers yet. We definitely need to start rethinking these things and stop leaving venue security up to promoters and kids in yellow T-shirts.

 

[Footer]

On 9/10 no one thought a box cutter was a danger on an airplane. Today we think differently and security has changed.

Last week we didn't think holding an event 400 yards from a tall hotel was a danger. Today we have to start thinking differently and change venue security. That said, without the US Military's best Sniper on hand to return fire (with a really lucky shot) there wasn't much we could have done to stop this. Do we need better hotel security? Acrylic shields over outdoor venues? Move outdoor events away from tall buildings? There are a LOT of questions and no good answers yet. We definitely need to start rethinking these things and stop leaving venue security up to promoters and kids in yellow T-shirts.

Yes, but how many of these do we have to do to actually change the industry? We've had this, Pulse, movie theatre shootings, Bataclan, etc. We did a ton as a country to change after 9/11 to ensure that would never happen again... and it worked. Its cost a ton and we gave up a lot of rights in the process. I know I'm going to cross over in to the gun debate here, but that is what it is.

We run fire drills. We have firecurtains. We flame proof everything. What was the last theatre fire you know about? Station fire happened, pyro gets banned in almost every venue in the country outside of the very large scale shows. The industry changed. Indianan happens. Overnight every truss stage is getting inspected and most get thrown out in favor of trucked stages. Once again, the industry changed. We are ignoring this as both a country and as an industry. How many venues have ran active shooter drills? How many venues have a real plan on the books? How many festivals plan for it?

I'm not saying any of this could have prevented this... but who knows. Its a rather shitty situation that everyone is just ignoring and hoping will go away. More people are getting killed attending shows/movies/clubs by a mass murderer than fire. Maybe you don't have a festival next to a tall building. Maybe just like getting scanned at the airport that is what we lose as a society due to this.

 

[Footer]

In what way would highly trained Venue security personnel have been able to prevent or limit the damage done by a shooter who was across the street and several floors up firing indiscriminately into a crowd? Shall we encase every outdoor venue in a Poly carbonate dome? How bout we give all the rent-a-cops grenades and riot guns?

Nothing. Only thing that could have stopped this is if someone during pre-production would have brought up the risk of doing this show near a high rise with windows that can open. Thats about it... and that guy would have gotten laughed out of the room.

 

[techieman33]

Yes, but how many of these do we have to do to actually change the industry? We've had this, Pulse, movie theatre shootings, Bataclan, etc. We did a ton as a country to change after 9/11 to ensure that would never happen again... and it worked. Its cost a ton and we gave up a lot of rights in the process. I know I'm going to cross over in to the gun debate here, but that is what it is.

At best it stopped that one method of attack. But for all the billions of dollars that have been spent, and the rights that have been taken from us it still doesn't work. You constantly hear stories about people getting through with knives and other weapons. IMO it's more security theater than it is real security. All this "protection" for commerical airliners, but the the private side is still largely security free. Instead of a 747 a terrorist could just as easily load up a private plane with explosives or flammables and accomplish the same thing. Look at all the money and effort that goes into protecting the President. Sure it works for the most part, but even that isn't 100% effective. At the end of the day if someone wants to kill people and they're willing to die in the process there isn't a whole lot we can do to stop them. If we lock down concert venues they'll just find a different place to attack.

 

[StradivariusBone]

Its cost a ton and we gave up a lot of rights in the process. I know I'm going to cross over in to the gun debate here, but that is what it is.

I hate that I feel this way and maybe it's a sign that I've turned too jaded, but if someone murdering 20 kids didn't spark a national outrage that resulted in serious change then I don't see this event changing much of anything. I've got a first grader and everything about this makes my stomach turn. And I'll be the first to admit, I have no freaking idea what a solution looks like, but it now seems that every time this sort of thing happens the same tired arguments and frustration are drug out and dusted off for as long as the news cycle lasts.

I don't think taking guns away is the problem-solver many people think it will be, but like so many other multifaceted problems of this world it gets boiled down into some inane two-party issue which effectively stalemates any rational debate or solution-seeking. And with things like the Station and the Iroquois there wasn't as much of a cultural hurdle to broach. There's no constitutional stance on using pyro in a venue or chaining emergency exits closed to derail legislation on those issues. What I don't get- Congress allows the CDC to research pretty much everything else that kills Americans except for guns. We don't even have a reasonable understanding of what gets a person to the point where they think it's alright to mow down a bunch of strangers with a firearm, much less how to get them help prior to the point. That, at least to me, is a logical place to start troubleshooting.

 

[Footer]

I hate that I feel this way and maybe it's a sign that I've turned too jaded, but if someone murdering 20 kids didn't spark a national outrage that resulted in serious change then I don't see this event changing much of anything. I've got a first grader and everything about this makes my stomach turn. And I'll be the first to admit, I have no freaking idea what a solution looks like, but it now seems that every time this sort of thing happens the same tired arguments and frustration are drug out and dusted off for as long as the news cycle lasts.

I don't think taking guns away is the problem-solver many people think it will be, but like so many other multifaceted problems of this world it gets boiled down into some inane two-party issue which effectively stalemates any rational debate or solution-seeking. And with things like the Station and the Iroquois there wasn't as much of a cultural hurdle to broach. There's no constitutional stance on using pyro in a venue or chaining emergency exits closed to derail legislation on those issues. What I don't get- Congress allows the CDC to research pretty much everything else that kills Americans except for guns. We don't even have a reasonable understanding of what gets a person to the point where they think it's alright to mow down a bunch of strangers with a firearm, much less how to get them help prior to the point. That, at least to me, is a logical place to start troubleshooting.

That is the issue in a nutshell. You need mental healthcare. You need to get these huge capacity clips and assault rifles off the streets (New York State already did this.... and people are still complaining). You need vigilance. You need education. You need drug rehab. You need to pretty much fix society as a whole. My wife has a family member who was killed at Columbine... they are still dumbfounded that they have to deal with this crap. Her uncle fought hard to get some type of legislation passed and was basically ignored....

The strange thing is that you go to Columbine today and you don't see the door numbers and classroom numbers on the outside of the building like you do in the community I live in. The security cameras are there... but there are no metal detectors or other barriers. So, what other communities did to prevent such things they decided not to do.

I don't think there is really anything that can be done on our side of the world. I also don't think I want to work in a place that thinks it is going to be attacked at any time. I'd rather leave the business and setup a 3d printing shop in the woods. If someone has no regard left for their own life it is pretty much impossible to stop them before an attack.

What we can do is prepare for it. Get a risk assessment of your building. Get law enforcement in so they know how to working in your building. Have staff procedures in place and drill often.

It all really comes down to do we want to lose freedoms to try to prevent this or do we want to just call this the new normal and go from there.

 

[StradivariusBone]

The strange thing is that you go to Columbine today and you don't see the door numbers and classroom numbers on the outside of the building like you do in the community I live in. The security cameras are there... but there are no metal detectors or other barriers. So, what other communities did to prevent such things they decided not to do.

This hits on another issue of the knee-jerk reaction these types of things tend to have. A few years back people got worked up over sudden cardiac deaths in public and started pushing for auto-defibs to be made available in places like schools and venues. So a big push is made to buy these really expensive battery packs and heart monitors and install them all over the place. Problem solved?

After dealing with an experience first-hand where an auto-defibrillator would have been helpful had one been present I educated myself and learned that many of these things are installed and never maintained and so the batteries in them no longer work in an emergency that might happen 3 or 4 years after it was purchased. The knee-jerk reaction is to get it installed, but there's almost never a maintenance plan with these type of fixes. Or if there is one, it's only followed until enough people move on or retire and then it's forgotten until the next crisis.

Same goes with security. A locked gate is only secure until people forget their keys enough times and start propping it open. As a maintainer of things (like I suspect many of you are too) this climate of "hurry up and fix it!" drives me bat**** crazy. There is nothing on this Earth that I've found that will work forever without some salty tech hitting it with WD40 or a c-wrench from time to time, in a manner of speaking.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

One researcher claims an incident like this every 6 1/2 weeks since before 1980. I do think the instant reporting and social media make it different.

 

[Footer]

This hits on another issue of the knee-jerk reaction these types of things tend to have. A few years back people got worked up over sudden cardiac deaths in public and started pushing for auto-defibs to be made available in places like schools and venues. So a big push is made to buy these really expensive battery packs and heart monitors and install them all over the place. Problem solved?

After dealing with an experience first-hand where an auto-defibrillator would have been helpful had one been present I educated myself and learned that many of these things are installed and never maintained and so the batteries in them no longer work in an emergency that might happen 3 or 4 years after it was purchased. The knee-jerk reaction is to get it installed, but there's almost never a maintenance plan with these type of fixes. Or if there is one, it's only followed until enough people move on or retire and then it's forgotten until the next crisis.

Same goes with security. A locked gate is only secure until people forget their keys enough times and start propping it open. As a maintainer of things (like I suspect many of you are too) this climate of "hurry up and fix it!" drives me bat**** crazy. There is nothing on this Earth that I've found that will work forever without some salty tech hitting it with WD40 or a c-wrench from time to time, in a manner of speaking.

We have the AED's all over our building. I have one in each theatre lobby and one at our loading dock. We also staff an EMT during shows. All of my crew heads and house managers are trained on them and get renewed every other year. They actually get inspected by the same person who inspects emergency lighting, exit signs, and fire extinguishers. It can be done but there has to be procedures put in place to keep it going. We also pay a company to keep our first aid kits stocked and keep oxygen on hand. Systems are not cheap. But... we probably send at least 10-20 patrons a year away in an ambulance. We have pulled and used an AED a few times.

BTW, if you have never worked in a place with stocked first aid kits it is pretty amazing. We use Cintas to do ours. Literally the kits have everything you would ever want, including headache medicine, good tweezers, and all the dings and scratch repair imaginable.

 

[bclighting]

One researcher claims an incident like this every 6 1/2 weeks since before 1980. I do think the instant reporting and social media make it different.

I agree completely and wholeheartedly!

To add to that, why does the media feel the need to further glorify the perpetrator by repeatedly showing their picture? This just dumbfounds me, they should never show the picture again and if they do it should be censored to show that those that do this type of thing are not deserving of the attention.

 

[techieman33]

I agree completely and wholeheartedly!

To add to that, why does the media feel the need to further glorify the perpetrator by repeatedly showing their picture? This just dumbfounds me, they should never show the picture again and if they do it should be censored to show that those that do this type of thing are not deserving of the attention.

Because the only thing they really care about is ratings. Creating panic and sensationalizing the news is good for their bottom line. With 24 hour news and thousands of competing websites they'll do whatever it takes to attract readers and viewers. 30 years ago this would have been a couple minutes on the news and a couple of newspaper articles. Now they have to do whatever they can to stretch it out as long as possible while waiting for the next new crisis.

 

[gafftapegreenia]

Because the only thing they really care about is ratings. Creating panic and sensationalizing the news is good for their bottom line. With 24 hour news and thousands of competing websites they'll do whatever it takes to attract readers and viewers. 30 years ago this would have been a couple minutes on the news and a couple of newspaper articles. Now they have to do whatever they can to stretch it out as long as possible while waiting for the next new crisis.

I think that even in the 1980s that 550+ people getting shot by one guy might have gotten a bit more than a few minutes on the local nightly news. Medical tech of the day means that likely more people would have died. Heck, even Reagan would have had to have done something more than offer a few thoughts and prayers.

The 24 hour cable news cycle has certainly sensationalized trivial events, but I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that the "mainstream media" has invented a national crisis for their own benefits.

 

[TheaterEd]

If you haven't seen Jim Jeffries' bit on gun control in America vs Gun control in Austrailia, it's worth your time.

Warning, very NSFW Language. Part 1 Part 2

 

[Protech]

Thankfully no one in the immediate Protech family was harmed, though we all have multiple friends of friends and extended family that have been impacted by this utterly senseless tragedy. These things really are surreal when it happens in your back yard...

Our hearts and warmest wishes go out to victims and their families. I still can't wrap my head around this...

 

[JohnD]

I do have to point out that there is more to this than gun control, remember the Oklahoma City Bombing. Evil is evil and crazy is crazy.

 

[TimMc]

I do have to point out that there is more to this than gun control, remember the Oklahoma City Bombing. Evil is evil and crazy is crazy.

The LV shooter also had ammonium nitrate and tannerite. It appears he wasn't limiting himself to his arsenal of firearms.