The Fastest and Most Effective Solution to School Shooting.

[fncceo]

In Israel, the school teachers carry guns.

There is a reason people say that Jews are smart. It's not just all good looks with us.

 

[Weatherman2020]

I disagree with your position and your mockery again.

preferred is a gun.........if not allowed I'd rather have a can of raid than nothing but my dick against a gun.

You do know they aren't gonna arm all the teachers.........in a few weeks this will die down and back to the same ole.

So if we are finished mocking each other. Why did they wait so long to go in again? Knowing children were being murdered.

Smart schools will be posting that sign tomorrow and begin training teachers.

Only way it’ll end.

 

[eagle1462010]

Don't know, wasn't there.

I can tell you that in the past few years, many departments, including mine, have changed policy. Instead of waiting for a tactical response.

In a very specific scenario, called Active Armed Offender where:

1. Offender is currently armed
2. Has demonstrated they will take victims (has fired shots)
3. And still has access to victims (not in an empty building)

The policy is, don't wait for SWAT, anyone from plain-clothed to rookie street cop, if you're armed, you go in, preferably in numbers (pairs working to clear rooms), and keep going until the AAO has been put down.

However, there are nearly 5,000 separate police departments in America, all with different policies, procedures, and resources. What policies this PD had in place is really up to their city government and leadership.

A note about this. In the training, all cops are told to wear hi-vis vests over their uniform. The reason being that in scenario after scenario, you chances of being shot by one of your fellow cops who is also in the building is a lot higher than being shot by the AAO. But, that's just part of the job.

Good answer. I still can't understand how they could wait knowing the children are getting shot...........I'll never understand that.

 

[SavannahMann]

OK, you can’t name one mass shooter at a hardened target.

2016 shooting of Dallas police officers - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

If memory serves. Wasn’t he blown up?

 

[eagle1462010]

According to this the shooter was still inside killing as this was going on.

 

[fncceo]

I'll never understand that.

To put things into perspective, here is a little history behind the "wait for SWAT" policy.

In the late '60s, early '70s incidents of hostage taking scenarios began to skyrocket. Airline hijacking became so commonplace that the idea of a plane hijacking became the butt of jokes on TV and in movies.

Police were woefully ill-equipped and untrained to deal with this rise in situations. The result was, a rise in dead cops, dead hostages, and dead by-standers.

The skilled involved in creating effective cordons, clearing rooms, and not shooting other cops were not taught in academy. In those days, cops got practically no tactical training post academy, unlike now. None of these techniques can be learned from watching re-runs of "Adam-12" or "911".

The solution to the problem was to create specially trained, specially equipped units, typically called SWAT, to deal with that. While expensive, the cost of training and equipping every police officer to deal with a hostage scenario was prohibitive and wasteful.

Of course, like any government policy, a good idea will grow exponentially until it becomes ungainly and less and less responsive to active situations on the ground. If you get appointed as a SWAT unit officer-in-charge. You won't get promoted unless you make a name for yourself by creating more and more complicated procedures to pill on top of existing procedure. More procedure means a more complex, and slower, response.

Government only makes changes in response to crises and it took a situation where hostages were killed in great numbers while police coordinated their response to get many departments to spend the huge amounts of money to give all cops some training in hostage rescue.

The current policy of sending under trained responders into a shooter scenario isn't perfect, the danger to police and to hostages increases with less training for the responders. However, it is a compromise that will probably be widely adopted until something happens that brings it under attack.

My thinking is that the cops on the ground at this job were specifically told to stay outside the cordon until tactical assets arrived. Ulveda is a small town and has a small force, that may very well be their policy.

 

[eagle1462010]

To put things into perspective, here is a little history behind the "wait for SWAT" policy.

In the late '60s, early '70s incidents of hostage taking scenarios began to skyrocket. Airline hijacking became so commonplace that the idea of a plane hijacking became the butt of jokes on TV and in movies.

Police were woefully ill-equipped and untrained to deal with this rise in situations. The result was, a rise in dead cops, dead hostages, and dead by-standers.

The skilled involved in creating effective cordons, clearing rooms, and not shooting other cops were not taught in academy. In those days, cops got practically no tactical training post academy, unlike now. None of these techniques can be learned from watching re-runs of "Adam-12" or "911".

To solution to the problem was to create specially trained, specially equipped units, typically called SWAT, to deal with that. While expensive, the cost of training and equipping every police officer to deal with a hostage scenario was prohibitive and wasteful.

Of course, like any government policy, a good idea will grow exponentially until it becomes ungainly and less and less responsive to active situations on the ground.

Government only makes changes in response to crises and it took a situation where hostages were killed in great numbers while police coordinated their response to get many departments to spend the huge amounts of money to give all cops some training in hostage rescue.

The current policy of sending under trained responders into a shooter scenario isn't perfect, the danger to police and to hostages increases with less training for the responders. However, it is a compromise that will probably be widely adopted until something happens that brings it under attack.

My thinking is that the cops on the ground at this job were specifically told to stay outside the cordon until tactical assets arrived. Ulveda is a small town and has a small force, that may very well be their policy.

Sounds right. But I still couldn't stand down knowing they are being shot inside. Lose job or life wouldn't matter to me.

 

[fncceo]

But I still couldn't stand down knowing they are being shot inside

Was anyone actually shot during the response time? I've watched those videos and I hear a lot of parents screaming, but I don't hear any shot.

I'll need to see a detailed after-action to see if the emotional response to the incident is in line with what was actually happening on the ground.

I don't have any information on which to make a decision right now except emotional videos. So, I won't offer one.

 

[eagle1462010]

Was anyone actually shot during the response time? I've watched those videos and I hear a lot of parents screaming, but I don't hear any shot.

I'll need to see a detailed after-action to see if the emotional response to the incident is in line with what was actually happening on the ground.

I don't have any information on which to make a decision right now except emotional videos. So, I won't offer one.

It will come out in time.

 

[fncceo]

It will come out in time.

So, I will wait.

 

[westwall]

I wear body armor every day ... I wouldn't trust it to stop a paper clip shot with a rubber band. Actually, not true --- we have tried that and it seems to be effective.

I have not experienced it but, I have it on good authority that getting shot in the jacket, even if it doesn't fully penetrate the jacket, still hurts like a mo-fo. Much more than being tased or sprayed.

Personally, and this is because I have been trained that way, head shots are not practical for a moving assailant. The head moves more than any part of our body and the chances of a miss are exponentially increased. A missed shot will continue to be lethal for up to 1.000 yards and anyone in its way could be a casualty.

Putting a security round into the head of an offender already on the ground, while a really good way to be sure he won't get up, would end you up in court for excessive force.

Take a look at safe life defence armor. My set cost 2k. Worth every penny.

 

[SweetSue92]

All mass murderers like soft targets.
Stopped by a High School in Texas, they had a big sign as you approached the school:

PLEASE BE AWARE THAT THE SCHOOL STAFF ARE ARMED AND MAY USE WHATEVER FORCE NECESSARY TO PROTECT OUR STUDENTS.

Even if no school employee has a concealed weapon, a shooter will go to another location.

You folks are just too much. You don't trust teachers to tell children they prefer soft serve yogurt over ice cream--"TOO PERSONAL"--but are now clamoring for us to be armed. Like you TRUST us lol

Listen, even conservative teachers are not fooled here. So really.

 

[westwall]

You folks are just too much. You don't trust teachers to tell children they prefer soft serve yogurt over ice cream--"TOO PERSONAL"--but are now clamoring for us to be armed. Like you TRUST us lol

Listen, even conservative teachers are not fooled here. So really.

There are many teachers I respect. I have no problems with them being armed.

I have a problem with groomers. No 8 year old or younger child should hear about a teachers sex life.

Period.

 

[SweetSue92]

There are many teachers I respect. I have no problems with them being armed.

I have a problem with groomers. No 8 year old or younger child should hear about a teachers sex life.

Period.

Uh huh

I'm pro 2nd amendment and we are gun owners. However something goes sideways in a classroom with a gun? (and oh let me tell you how it could)...who would be first blamed?

 

[westwall]

Uh huh

I'm pro 2nd amendment and we are gun owners. However something goes sideways in a classroom with a gun? (and oh let me tell you how it could)...who would be first blamed?

Does it? Why? I see brave teachers dying to try and save their students. Dying with no hope, and yet they still try.

I say give them the tools they need.

 

[eagle1462010]

You folks are just too much. You don't trust teachers to tell children they prefer soft serve yogurt over ice cream--"TOO PERSONAL"--but are now clamoring for us to be armed. Like you TRUST us lol

Listen, even conservative teachers are not fooled here. So really.

Lol

Grooming versus sitting duck is not the same. And I havent said all teachers are groomers. Just you feel when we attack those that do its against you too which isnt true

 

[SweetSue92]

Lol

Grooming versus sitting duck is not the same. And I havent said all teachers are groomers. Just you feel when we attack those that do its against you too which isnt true

Many do attack the whole profession though....attack us and then trust us with guns around kids?? What a messy conclusion. Pick a side

 

[Unkotare]

Arm teachers and stop making schools soft targets.
It’s for the children.

People are grasping for simplistic solutions without thinking them through.

 

[dblack]

People are grasping for simplistic solutions without thinking them through.

And unscrupulous politicians are happy to cater to their delusions

 

[eagle1462010]

Many do attack the whole profession though....attack us and then trust us with guns around kids?? What a messy conclusion. Pick a side

2 different issues ive already made my opinion clear