Active shooter training varies widely across the country, and law enforcement officers often make similar mistakes in mass shootings. However, these failures are not always clearly identified in reports analyzing the incidents, making it challenging to learn from past errors, as reported by Lexi Churchill and Lomi Kriel for ProPublica, The Texas Tribune, and FRONTLINE.
Despite the U.S. experiencing over 120 mass shootings in the last two-and-a-half decades, a joint investigation by the three publications revealed that there is no nationally agreed-upon standard for conducting after-action assessments of law enforcement response. There is uncertainty regarding who should conduct these assessments, what aspects they should evaluate, and whether the findings should be made public. An analysis of more than three dozen publicly available after-action reports showed that some reports omitted crucial details about officers’ actions or failed to thoroughly investigate other mistakes, such as delays in engaging the shooter. Experts conducting these reviews mentioned facing limitations like key personnel refusing to cooperate or legal constraints hindering the sharing of records. In some instances, the review’s scope may be limited to specific areas like the medical response or focused solely on the requesting agency’s role.
