Active shooters in schools: The enemy is denial

Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
5,080
Likes
703
Location
Somerset, Ma
good read... I do like this part

5. Destroy — Police officers and agencies should consider the following:
a. Carry off duty. No one would tell a firefighter who has a fire extinguisher in his trunk that he’s crazy or paranoid.
b. Equip every cop in America with a patrol rifle. One chief of police, upon getting rifles for all his officers once said, “If an active killer strikes in my town, the response time will be measured in feet per second.”
c. Put smoke grenades in the trunk of every cop car in America. Any infantryman who needs to attack across open terrain or perform a rescue under fire deploys a smoke grenade. A fire extinguisher will do a decent job in some cases, but a smoke grenade is designed to perform the function.
d. Have a “go-to-war bag” filled with lots of loaded magazines and supplies for tactical combat casualty care.
e. Use helicopters. Somewhere in your county you probably have one or more of the following: medevac, media, private, national guard, coast guard rotors.
f. Employ the crew-served, continuous-feed, weapon you already have available to you (a firehouse) by integrating the fire service into your active shooter training. It is virtually impossible for a killer to put well-placed shots on target while also being blasted with water at 300 pounds per square inch.
g. Armed citizens can help. Think United 93. Whatever your personal take on gun control, it is all but certain that a killer set on killing is more likely to attack a target where the citizens are unarmed, rather than one where they are likely to encounter an armed citizen response.​


looks like a pretty good reason for armed citizens to have all those same weapons...
 
Last edited:
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
2,114
Likes
314
Just reading that quote spcantwell put up makes me want to read this. OMG, amazing!

My whole pitch for some time now has been, we make things like crime watch and people say it's for good police/public relations. I said, police are citizens too, so it's not about relations, but working together.

They do big training sessions to get officers to work together with paramedics and firefighters and hazmat, etc. so where did the logic fall short that citizens shouldn't be trained to defend their neighbors as well? And I did say the word "trained"!

The act of deputizing someone isn't that old a concept! My grandfather joined because the chief said, "can you fire this gun." My grandfather fired it and looked competent and he replied, "you're hired. Go do this..."

Now is everyone in the community brave enough to step up? Of course not! And that's okay. Some people are spotters and some people are front line. Everyone has a roll. This is what we call building community and it's not a communist act for us to be good friends with our neighbors and work together for a common cause and what better cause that our personal security?

We keep hearing that officers are short handed, but when I said I want to help I keep hearing (not from my town btw) that I'm not competent to handle a weapon, etc. Who is to say I'm not better at handling it or the situations? I guess we'll never know if we keep these ignorant mindsets that the media have pounded in our heads for years!
 

gzt

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 21, 2012
Messages
106
Likes
8
Location
Western Mass
I like this approach. Finally someone with a brain (and some influance) provided really good view on the subject. Media and politicians behind them make me sick. Their ignorance and stupidity is beyond my acceptance of limited intelligence. Dave Grossman provides the real solution to the problem.

I carry a gun all the time, except were is "unlawful" to carry. I went to the clinic with my kid and there was an armed security officer and gun detector at the entrance. He searched my daughters bag and after I informed him on my LTC he simply said: you can not take a gun beyond that door. And this is how GUN FREE ZONES make sense. I gladly left my unloaded gun in a car safe and get back to the clinic.
Stupid politicians will make another stupid law about gun free zones and blame us, gun owners, for all tragedies that happened there.
Another scary place for me is an airport. Knowing that I have to leave my gun beyond airport limits really scares me. It is another tragedy to happen if nobody with brain take care of this issue.
 

Climbnsink

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
4,684
Likes
2,639
Sorry but he is just angling for more police work. Got to get local cops(and fed $) before the TSA gets the $chool protection racket. Arm teachers or accept a certain amount of loss. How hard will it be for a shooter to get the drop on a bored school cop? Just shoot him while he checks fb on his phone.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
7,266
Likes
1,417
Location
Metrowest
How hard will it be for a shooter to get the drop on a bored school cop? Just shoot him while he checks fb on his phone.
this is going to be true of absolutely everyone. Unless you constantly drill, and let's be honest, most people who carry, including professionally! do not, the 99% of the time that nothing happens informs your expectations and when/if something does happen, whatever scant training you have will have to carry you through.

Frankly, the armed or unarmed guard at the door or gate serves two simple purposes: to deter, and failing that, to raise the alarm. This was true when I managed unarmed civilian security guards, and this was true when we had troops deployed at remote posts.
 

Climbnsink

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
4,684
Likes
2,639
Yup. Deterrence doesn't work for school shooters, just another body to step over. The advantage of armed teachers(I know that ain't going to fly some places and some places no teachers will step up) is the shooter not knowing who is armed. If we get cops in schools it is going to be the chiefs pedophile nephew no one wants to work with that draws the gig. No one wins.
this is going to be true of absolutely everyone. Unless you constantly drill, and let's be honest, most people who carry, including professionally! do not, the 99% of the time that nothing happens informs your expectations and when/if something does happen, whatever scant training you have will have to carry you through.

Frankly, the armed or unarmed guard at the door or gate serves two simple purposes: to deter, and failing that, to raise the alarm. This was true when I managed unarmed civilian security guards, and this was true when we had troops deployed at remote posts.
 

OB1Kenobi

Banned
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 5, 2011
Messages
3,568
Likes
1,052
Yup. Deterrence doesn't work for school shooters, just another body to step over. The advantage of armed teachers(I know that ain't going to fly some places and some places no teachers will step up) is the shooter not knowing who is armed. If we get cops in schools it is going to be the chiefs pedophile nephew no one wants to work with that draws the gig. No one wins.
really dude? you picked ONE part of whole thing "cops" and ran with it. did you NOT read it? he's explaining multiple layers of over lapping protection and taking a closer look at security protocols, lock down training, single points of exit / entry ect.
 

Climbnsink

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
4,684
Likes
2,639
Might I ask what happened to you have this extreme view of security guards?
Active shooters are not opportunistic criminals, they are not waiting for the clerk to be distracted to pocket a candy bar. Silly little badges, security talky talk procedures all that cute stuff doesn't matter. Can you breach the door(or just go through a window) and shoot people? You can't defend against that and still get to see the sun.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
671
Likes
75
Location
Amherst, NH
I went to a LEO/MIL day long seminar that LTC Grossman did at SigArms Academy in '02. At the last minute, they opened up the last few slots to civvies. Hands down, the best 8 hour training of my life. I have been trying to see him again since, but no dice.

His website, killology.com has his calendar. If you can, you must go see him. Electrifying in person.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
2,114
Likes
314
Active shooters are not opportunistic criminals, they are not waiting for the clerk to be distracted to pocket a candy bar. Silly little badges, security talky talk procedures all that cute stuff doesn't matter. Can you breach the door(or just go through a window) and shoot people? You can't defend against that and still get to see the sun.
I'm not sure that really answered my question. You're talking about the attacker again and he sounds like a trained combatant in a military setting, not a mentally ill 20 year old who borrowed a gun from his mom.

I'm okay with that thinking because if you're really a security guy then why not train for the worst, right? That still doesn't help me to understand that they're all silly little badges, security talky talk, procedures all that cute stuff that doesn't matter.

I'm not trying to say you're wrong, but I've found that people with strong opinions have come into contact with something that gave them a strong opinion. For instance Feinstein would argue with you on all points and I think she has PTSD from the first gun conflict that makes her think they're all tactical battles and the only way out is to destroy the cause. She has a all or nothing thinking like you do. While I think that everyone here, if you said, "today we're going to get some armed guards and train and arm them and we'll move up to arming teachers later" would be okay with that mindset.

Hell, I could be wrong on all my points. The only way I'm going to know though, is to ask.
 

cekim

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,684
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
Yup. Deterrence doesn't work for school shooters, just another body to step over..
wow, history fail.

Active shooters generally off themselves or surrender at the first confrontation... granted we are talking about loonies as a class of people, but the stats show that you just need to get a gun pointed their way. Any gun... That is why the police post columbine changed to "get someone in there," from their prior "create a perimeter and prepare for a standoff."

Deterrence does work, both at the macro and micro level. They choose gun free zones for a reason.

I am absolutely against forming another federal bureaucracy or even federal funding for a state bureaucracy. Each community should decide what it needs to do free from gun or education regulations and act like the parents they are and protect their kids.

This tragedy, hopefully, will at least set a more realistic view of what is possible, though I see already that there is too much fear and panic to get anything "realistic" here. This is a less than lightning strike event. There is no "solution" only a broader need for better communities, fewer regulations on law abiding people and a more realistic view of what en loco parentis means and what duties it implies on those charged with the care of our children.
 

Climbnsink

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
4,684
Likes
2,639
It is all security theatre. If your intent is to end up dead after killing a bunch of people there is no deterrence against that, and really no defense. Even if you locked up schools tight, someone could just shoot up a summer camp(Norway.) Or a football game or a Chucky Cheese.
 
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
14,032
Likes
1,579
Location
New Hampshire
It is all security theatre. If your intent is to end up dead after killing a bunch of people there is no deterrence against that, and really no defense. Even if you locked up schools tight, someone could just shoot up a summer camp(Norway.) Or a football game or a Chucky Cheese.
Security is often done in layers. Think about securing a vehicle:

1. Take out keys, lock doors and roll up windows.
2. Add steering wheel look.
3. Add vehicle alarm.
4. Add ignition kill switch.
5. Park car in locked garage.
6. Purchase insurance policy against loss.

Nothing is totally fool-proof. But when a layered approach is taken, e.g. single-point entries, cameras, authentication protocol (e.g. "buzzed" front door), abolishing GFZs, adding uniformed security personal, adding police resource officer, etc. is a layered approach for student safety.

Again, it's just like the fire safety measures taken, as mentioned in the article.
 

cekim

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,684
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
It is all security theatre. If your intent is to end up dead after killing a bunch of people there is no deterrence against that, and really no defense. Even if you locked up schools tight, someone could just shoot up a summer camp(Norway.) Or a football game or a Chucky Cheese.
History says you are wrong... There is a defense, confront the shooter. When that happens the killing stops one way or another.

Just one example of which I speak:
Benner gave us some statistics about active shooter/killers in the United States: 98 percent act alone, 75 percent will have more than one gun, and 90 percent will commit suicide at the scene of their killings.
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/cc...es-active-shooterkiller-course-for-civilians/
I won't pretend to understand the mind of someone who could do such a thing, but it seems logical to assume that in choosing locations they presume are unarmed and terminating their rampage at the first sign of confrontation that a deranged as they are, they are also not prepared for a "fight" and in choosing a soft target, they are not confident in their advantage either.

I am not alone in that conclusion, again see current active shooter doctrine which has shifted to an aggressive intervention approach rather than surround and contain.
 

OB1Kenobi

Banned
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 5, 2011
Messages
3,568
Likes
1,052
History says you are wrong... There is a defense, confront the shooter. When that happens the killing stops one way or another.

Just one example of which I speak:


I won't pretend to understand the mind of someone who could do such a thing, but it seems logical to assume that in choosing locations they presume are unarmed and terminating their rampage at the first sign of confrontation that a deranged as they are, they are also not prepared for a "fight" and in choosing a soft target, they are not confident in their advantage either.

I am not alone in that conclusion, again see current active shooter doctrine which has shifted to an aggressive intervention approach rather than surround and contain.
yup.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
2,114
Likes
314
I am not alone in that conclusion, again see current active shooter doctrine which has shifted to an aggressive intervention approach rather than surround and contain.
Woah, wait. Are we actually learning to be proactive and not victims? Oh my God,there is hope for humanity yet! Notice I didn't say aggressors either. I said proactive. That's right. If you're ever going to stop this runaway train then we're going to have to get in front of it.

If there is one thing I have always hated it's that we teach our kids to "let the bad man clear out the register and he'll go away and leave you alone." That's what the terrorists on 9/11 said, "everyone just stay calm and everything will be all right." Put your life in your opponent's hands and he will treat your life as the value that he sees in it. Take control of your own life and you can set your own value.
 

Tater

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
1,910
Likes
298
Location
CENTRAL MA
May 05, 2010
this was written well brfore sandy hook...

g. Armed citizens can help. Think United 93. Whatever your personal take on gun control, it is all but certain that a killer set on killing is more likely to attack a target where the citizens are unarmed, rather than one where they are likely to encounter an armed citizen response.
 
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
5,080
Likes
703
Location
Somerset, Ma
This does also bring us back to the whole concept of a lockdown which never made any sense to me. Locking yourself into a room with only one point of access only works if you can secure that point, either with a weapon to keep anyone else out or with a strong enough door that no one can get in... Of cource that doesnt take into account huge windows that are common in most schools...
It seems that in a lot of these mass shootings the best bet (assumeing you cant actively fight back) is to get out ASAP. If for no other reason, a running target is harder to hit then one sitting in a corner
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Messages
2
Likes
0
Great article. Thanks for the read.

- - - Updated - - -

Great article. Thanks for the read.
 

Climbnsink

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
4,684
Likes
2,639
Lock your car up and you can still be shot through the window or door. These people aren't taking anything they are shooting people. Bar the doors and bulletproof the windows and then someone just has to set it on fire.
The put a cop in schools argument is the same one the antis use, you don't need guns because the cops have them and that is a deterrent/defense.


Security is often done in layers. Think about securing a vehicle:

1. Take out keys, lock doors and roll up windows.
2. Add steering wheel look.
3. Add vehicle alarm.
4. Add ignition kill switch.
5. Park car in locked garage.
6. Purchase insurance policy against loss.

Nothing is totally fool-proof. But when a layered approach is taken, e.g. single-point entries, cameras, authentication protocol (e.g. "buzzed" front door), abolishing GFZs, adding uniformed security personal, adding police resource officer, etc. is a layered approach for student safety.

Again, it's just like the fire safety measures taken, as mentioned in the article.
 

Picton

NES Member
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
12,293
Likes
12,473
Location
MA
I went to a LEO/MIL day long seminar that LTC Grossman did at SigArms Academy in '02. At the last minute, they opened up the last few slots to civvies. Hands down, the best 8 hour training of my life. I have been trying to see him again since, but no dice.

His website, killology.com has his calendar. If you can, you must go see him. Electrifying in person.
Grossman's been writing about this entire topic since at least 1996. He was all over the place after Columbine. He applies accepted PhD-level analysis to the act of killing, and his book is a real eye-opener.

I worked for him for about five months just after I commissioned; "electrifying" doesn't begin to describe it. The man's a freakin' genius, but his delivery would scare the sheep. In the world of "Meet the Press," guys like Grossman are unfortunately not the greatest representative of common-sense violence prevention, which is why he mostly speaks before LEOs/military. I saw him give a briefing in the summer of 1997 that had about 300 cadets ready to kill themselves if he just gave the word.
 
Top Bottom