New–Old issues in outdoor event security: the United States perspective.  

 Tourism security is always a challenge.  No matter where an event is held, tourism security specialists must deal with a number of unique problems. For example, the specialist faces an unknown population composed principally of people who seek nothing more than a good time or relaxation, but at the same time, within that same population there might be people whose goal is to harm others. 

Out-of-door security, be it a festival, political rally, concert or sporting event presents the tourism security specialist with additional challenges.  For example, the two, thankfully, failed assassination attempts on President Trump’s life serve as examples of the difficulties inherent in out-of-door event security.  Specialists in out-of-doors security point to the fact that that these open venues contain numerous locations from which an attack against the performer or speaker and/or the attendees is almost unlimited.

Both tourism and security professionals recognize that event security concerns range from issues of safety to issues of violence, from mass shootings to political assassinations.  In the case of United States’ President Donald Trump, the assassins failed.  Tragically, in the case of the political activist, Charlie Kirk, the assassin was successful.  Although not universally loved, Charlie Kirk was a symbol of civility for hundreds of thousands of young people and a political icon.  With the passing of time, it became clear that due to his assassination in September of 2025, both security specialists and laypeople around the world posed the question of how did such a tragedy happen? Where did security fail and how do we prevent such an occurrence from happening again? The Kirk assassination demonstrated that political violence cannot only take the life of a public figure, but also can succeed in destroying an event and creating a political crisis.

The Kirk assassination forced event and security professionals to ask difficulty and necessary questions. Security professionals realize that the Kirk assassination can occur again and it is not restricted to any one particular location of time. To learn from these assassinations, be they successful or not, security personnel and even managers need to understand which event security protocols should be used and when to use them. Event security is also unique in that the security techniques employed must not destroy the event’s ambiance and must create proper security without interfering with the spirit of an event.  Event security professionals tend to desire ever greater security procedures; event organizers fear that these procedures will destroy the event’s message or enjoyment factor. These two conflicting desires create the potential for conflict between those hosting the event and those protecting the event.  A good hermeneutic is that there is never 100% security, that is to say that there is no life, reputation or object that cannot be destroyed, ruined or stolen.  Despite this reality and with careful planning and an understanding of outdoor event security, security professionals working in conjunction with law enforcement can do a great deal to mitigate risks.

Case study: The Charlie Kirk Assassination

The Kirk assassination is not unique in American politics. Assassinations such as presidential assassinations or that of Dr. Martin Luther King were not intended to change the course of political reality. They do, however, provide security specialists with a great deal of information. In the case of Charlie Kirk there was no active shooter who sought to kill multiple people, but rather chose to murder a single individual, the protocols from high profile public figures, be they from the world of politics or entertainment provide lessons for both security and event professionals.  

The table below shows some of the differences between mass shooting events and single assassination events

In the case of the Kirk assassination, a security professional must deal with a single individual who seeks to assassinate a particular individual.  The goal is not to harm unknown victims but rather a specific person or persons, and thus create a political or economic impact.  As noted above, the Kirk assassination was not a unique. Political or economic assassinations have greatly impacted world history, from the murder of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, whose murder might have triggered the First World War, to the assassination of John F. Kennedy, whose death possibly changed the trajectory of the Vietnam War.

This article below focuses on the single victim of an assassination and the assassin’s impact on large-scale outdoor events.  In the Kirk case, the assassin was a single individual armed with what might have been a pre-World War II rifle[1], and for political reasons sought to end the life of one particular individual.  His death was the result of an assassin commonly called a sniper.

Traditionally, there are two types of snipers, military snipers and political snipers.  Both utilize the same skill set and techniques; nevertheless, they are very different in their purpose. From the perspective of event security, the political sniper has a greater impact.

 Sniper attacks

In recent years there has been a marked increase in sniper attacks within the United States.  Some of these attacks have had a political motivation, in other cases the attack’s motivation is a mystery. In all cases these attacks  impact the public’s perception of insecurity and impact the meetings and events industry. For example, in 2025 alone, there were two sniper attempts on President Donald Trump’s life and a successful assassination of the political influencer, Charlie Kirk.  In the past, many assassination attempts came from close range with handguns being used, many of which were stopped, such as in the case of the failed assassination of former President Ronald Regan. These close-range attacks have now morphed into attacks from a distance and have created a whole new set of problems for security personnel.

From the perspective of tourism, snipers are not only a threat to outdoor events, but to the meetings and event industry in general. For example, in 2017, the Las Vegas concert shooter, Stephen Paddock, murdered numerous people at an outdoor music festival.  Paddock’s attack from afar illustrates the difficulty in protecting outdoor events and demonstrates the need precise security planning while at the same time not destroying the event’s ambiance.  

Basic Factors Needed for Event Security

Security specialists note that event security requires two major factors. These factors are (1) financial resources and (2) administrative support.  In order to have a secure event these two elements must be in sync with each other.  When this synchronization is lacking the probability of an incident increase.  Often administrators must make decisions based on a multiplicity of factors. For example, to assure an event’s profitability event leadership might choose to reduce overall event security.  Event management must also consider the need to balance security risks with public access. This reality means that tourism event managers must balance security personnel’s wants with real-world feasibility as understood by the general public and the media.

Additionally, just as in any profession there are the human factors that must be considered.   Event security personnel exhibit a wide range training, abilities, commitment, and knowledge.  These variables mean that often event managers must balance training levels and the number of potential security personnel within the event’s overall budget. In some cases, monetary and salary concerns may force event managers to make undesirable security reductions simply due to a lack of resources, political reasons or issues of publicity.  For example, event management must at times deal with unaffordable off-duty police officers or other security professionals whose wage excede their budget limitations. In these cases, economic considerations may force event managers to decide on hiring less security officers or hiring officers who have less training.

Preparing for outdoor events.

As previously noted, outdoor events require special care and planning and their security plan must be developed using a layered approach.  Some of the special challenges facing out-of-doors security include:

• Lack of dependable power resources,
• Managing of large and often dispersed crowds,
• Potential for animal attacks, ranging from snake bites to wild animals from outside of the event’s parameters,
• Poor or temporary infrastructure including temporary medical facilities,
• Poor roads that may become bogged down during weather emergencies,
• Topographical challenges
• Weather factors ranging from thunderstorms to tornados å

Security specialists often use the technical term, layered security, a term borrowed from the world of cybersecurity.  This term, also known as defense-in-depth security, refers to the use teams of specialized personnel to create redundant or cooperative controls and thus interacting to created layers of physical and administrative, and cyber security. Its basic concept is that if one part of the security plan fails, there will be other parts that will compensate for the failure by blocking, or slowing down the attack.  This layered approach means that management must have the needed knowledge to place each individual in the most advantageous positions based on each person’s skill set.   

In all event security a major challenge is having the correct people in the correct task. Due to financial and physical constraints this problem is greater than it might at first appear. As in the case of much of tourism, employee needs are seasonal.  This seasonality often forces event administrators to have to hire part-time employees who might lack specific skillsets.  To add to the difficulties leadership does not always understand which skillsets are needed, where they are needed, and which people have the required skill sets to perform the needed tasks.  Although all jobs at an event are necessary and valuable, each position requires different skill sets and training.

For this reason, outdoor event security needs a variety of personnel including unarmed and armed security  and due to seasonality and financial constraints these people might have a wide range of training, experiences, and skill sets.

Handguns and Assassinations

It is important to note that the majority of assassination attempts have been within a few feet of the victim and often use nothing more than a handgun. This threat is historically the primary method selected due to its lack of skill needed by the perpetrator and the incorrect belief that simply shooting someone will result in death. In reality, what matters most is where the victim is shot and not the caliber of the weapon. For this reason, it is wise to place the strongest, most highly trained security professionals closest to the person under the greatest threat in layer number one, that is the layer in closest proximity to the threatened individual. The next layer of security, layer number two, is composed of unarmed security personnel who specialize in crowd control. This outer layer, if used properly, should reduce the threat of the majority of up-close attempts.

Sniper threats

As noted above, trained snipers are not a new phenomenon nor are they easy to stop. The trained sniper is an expert his ability to destroy a life. Due to the sniper’s high level of “professionalism”, the counter-sniper must be both well-trained, have a great deal of patience and understand the physical layout in which the person whom s/he is protecting. Furthermore, the trained counter-sniper must be able to locate the attack sniper and act before the sniper has a chance to fire his armament.  If the counter sniper acts after the sniper has already acted then it is merely a punitive measure or an action hoping that additional people will not be targeted.

Because the human eye cannot focus on both near and far threats simultaneously, security personnel often overlook “the far away” threat due to the fact that most threats traditionally have been in the near range.  Despite that fact, especially when there are celebrities who are being protected and around whom the event is based, security professionals must consider the possibility of a long-range (distant) attack against such individuals in the form of a sniper and they must have a plan on how to deal with these potential “distant” threats.

 Protective planning

A security plan must always include a plan for threats at long distances, especially when the event is outdoors and in a fixed location. Although the probabilities of a person being shot at long-range during a period of movement, such as a vehicle egress, are minimal, it should also be considered. Any point at which a protected individual will come to a predetermined, fixed position with exposure to the outdoors is at risk of a sniper’s fire. When a public outdoor event is advertised months in advance, and the location is also selected this information allows a sniper the opportunity to scout the locale and prepare for an attack.

Almost every political or entertainment outdoor event is a possible target for a sniper. Therefore, prior to the event, part of the security package should include a consultation with a trained counter-sniper to evaluate the probability of such threats. If such an assessment determines that there is a risk of a sniper attack then, a counter-sniper can be considered for event security. When possible, such a counter-sniper would allow the event organizers to provide protection, called “overwatch,” throughout the event. If budgetary, authority, or even political appearances restrict that possibility, then a system that includes both technology and experienced personnel such as a spotter system can be utilized.

Issues of Technology

Often, tourism professionals believe that technology can provide easy and lower cost answers.  Unfortunately, technology provides only a partial answer to this problem. Technology, like drones and security cameras, is an excellent addition to the security toolkit, but technology also has its shortcomings. For example, many non-military drones have limited flight time and must have their batteries recharged on a consistent basis. Drones can have trouble in high winds, and in the civilian world, drone pilots must obtain authority to fly in specific locations. A drone’s field of vision is also limited and less adaptable than the human eye. Fixed video camera systems also have their problems and, in most cases, rather than stopping an assassin, merely provide post-event information about the perpetrator.

Lastly, there is a need to coordinate between event location personnel and security personnel.  For example, a padlock on a door’s hatch is not sufficient security. Security personnel know that a U.S.$30 set of bolt cutters can easily defeat a padlock. Furthermore, many roof hatches are not secure; these roof hatches are often behind “locked” doors that are sometimes left unlocked, and they are usually in secluded places that can easily provide someone the time to breach doors and gain access. Even if a roof hatch has a sensor on it, a would-be sniper can move quickly from the hatch to a shooting position and shoot before the hatch alert can be noticed or someone is sent to investigate.  

In today’s highly politicized world filled with both high and low technology, snipers can be highly effective killing machines that not only destroy lives but can have long lasting economic, political and tourism consequences. Snipers are always a potential major threat at any large-scale outdoor venue, yet with proper planning and good security assessments, event managers can drastically reduce that threat.  The sniper issue is one more example that good event security begins with a complete pre-event risk assessment by properly trained personnel.  A sniper can do more than destroy a life in a few seconds, but also the very reputation upon which the event is built.