Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

“Unprepared and Overwhelmed”

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • “Unprepared and Overwhelmed”

    I've seen this in numerous places but I haven't seen it here so I'll pass it along


    Michael Bane

    4 hrs ·



    THIS COMES PRETTY CLOSE TO MAKING ME PHYSICALLY ILL. For most of the autumn, THE BEST DEFENSE team was immersed in studying school shootings in preparation of our TBD episodes on school shootings that you will see in 2019. We worked with our top experts and in conjunction with the Disaster Management Institute at the Community College of Aurora, CO, and the ActiveShooter Response Training Center in Denver. I believe the sim we built and filmed is the most accurate and most realistic school shooting model possible, and I will unconditionally stand by the conclusions we reached from running the model.

    The most important conclusion we reached, and the most controversial, is the same one Greg Ellifritz reached -- we must teach our young people that THEY ARE ON THEIR OWN. We may wish that, indeed, we didn't live in such a world, but reality intrudes. The systems in place -- school administers, security staff, teachers (no matter how personally heroic they are), police, FBI -- cannot and will not save you. They will fail, and fail catastrophically,as they did at Parkland and as they have at many other mass casualty events.

    YOU are the only first responder who will definitely be on the scene.

    We live in a society that infantilizes young people, where "children" up to (and even beyond) 26 years old are seen as incapable of managing their own lives, instead locked into a series of authority structures that remove the necessity of independent thought. Compare this to how young people have been treated quite literally since we came out of the trees -- as productive members of the "tribe,"necessarily mentored and trained, but expected to take their place in society at what we would now consider an early age.

    I do not have any children, so I can't speak directly. But I do know what some of my best friends teach their own children, and it is NOT to trust authority figures and systems with their lives.


    The article from Ellifritz

    http://www.activeresponsetraining.ne...nd-overwhelmed
    "I suppose it's tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail...." ~Abraham Maslow~

    "Skill makes you harder to kill" ~ Unknown

  • #2
    pretty much sums it up, unorganized and unprofesional, and unprepared .
    PLAY THE TRUMP CARD IN 2016!!!

    Comment


    • #3
      It's hard because we teach our children to respect and listen to the guidance of authority figures like school staff and first responders bit at the same time reality shows us we can't always depend on them to make the right decisions.

      I have young kids still in elementary school and it concerns me. What are they being taught? Are they indoctrinating them with lala land trash? Are my children safe from physical and psychological harm?

      Then the question of how young is to young to start teaching them the reality of what could happen and how deep do you go into it.

      Then I get to worrying about the number of untrained and unpracticed dingleberries walking around just waiting for someone to make their day so they can live out some fantasy they've been nurturing in their tiny little minds while jacking it to their NRA decal.

      One part of me says put armed guards in schools then I reflect on some of the cops and resource officers I've met over the years, were in handgun classes with, had as firearm instructors and so on. That makes me wonder if my kids aren't better off seeking safety on their own.


      Failure is an opportunity to learn.

      Comment


      • #4
        While we certainly don't want to forget training the kids, the question I have is: how should first responders be trained. I think, like most of us, that the BCSO response was abysmal.

        From the article:

        My advice is to train your child to act independently, get out of the building, seek cover, and call the police at the first hint of shots being fired inside the school.
        Another question I have is what if the school does not permit this and insists on everyone staying in place?
        Taceant colloquia. Effugiat risus. Hic locus est ubi mors gaudet succurrere vitae.
        The Pale Horse available on Amazon for your digital reader.

        Comment


        • #5
          IMO, all public schools should make Teen CERT mandatory for their teen-aged students, and CERT training mandatory for their faculty and staff. Trauma kits must be prolifically distributed in the rooms and hallways, and accessible without keys or other access control devices or techniques. Each building on the campus should have at least one, preferably many more, trained concealed carry faculty/staff members, who are trained to work as a team and to be able to work independently, to eliminate threats and treat wounded. Since the "good guys" always show up late, i.e., after the shooting begins, and then make entry, and many entry teams do not yet have combat medics, the school faculty/staff and students must be self-sufficient enough to handle the situation until the threat is neutralized and EMS is treating injured patients. In fact, I would go so far as to say (and this may offend the LEOs here) that LE should not enter the campus until the school principal or head of security, verifies that the threat is neutralized. Keeping LE out is vital, IMO, to prevent delays in the school security team from doing their job of clearing the school. The school personnel are the Immediate Responders, they are the Incident Commanders, the first on scene, who know the situation better than the LEOs on the outside, so they should be the ones in charge of handling the situation. Once the threat is neutralized, EMS should be first in, with LE coming in later to do the investigations. I know this may seem bass ackwards to conventional methods, but conventional methods don't work in school shootings.

          Here's a related link that I picked up from a DHS or FEMA email:

          http://www.activeresponsetraining.ne...ity-done-right
          http://youtu.be/ei8OK4WdoW0
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4CuH...e=channel_page
          http://www.stoppingpower.net/comment...tervention.asp
          http://youtu.be/wXwPtP-KDNk
          https://youtu.be/Iy71umadb6k

          Comment


          • #6
            I'd certainly go along with the kids and staff having training and supplies to treat injuries, and there is nothing wrong with having armed staff on hand. Not sure I'd want that armed staff clearing the building; would much rather see them trained in 'forting up' in the classroom, with ability to secure doors/windows, position the kids in a safe, covered area in the room, and just cover the door to 'repel boarders' (if I can use a slightly facetious term here). Let the LEO's clear the building, do any searches that need done. They're the ones who are (or should be) trained for that; the teachers and other staff could be more easily trained in the 'simpler' task of static defense, and less risk of being misidentified if a/some LEO came into the building and spotted them 'lurking' around with a weapon in hand.
            IF the school has multiple full-time security team members, or more than one RSO in those districts that use on-duty LEO in that position, one of their primary responsibilities should be training to work together to clear and secure the building(s). If there is only one security or RSO, he/she should be trained and rehearsed in tactics that would be appropriate for a single officer--and when outside LEO shows up, the lone security officer--or the team--would (should?) be much more recognizable as to who they are.
            There's $.02 to spend any way you want. Ace2
            Sometimes the term 'Idiot' is a description and not an insult.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Ace View Post
              I'd certainly go along with the kids and staff having training and supplies to treat injuries, and there is nothing wrong with having armed staff on hand. Not sure I'd want that armed staff clearing the building; would much rather see them trained in 'forting up' in the classroom, with ability to secure doors/windows, position the kids in a safe, covered area in the room, and just cover the door to 'repel boarders' (if I can use a slightly facetious term here). Let the LEO's clear the building, do any searches that need done. They're the ones who are (or should be) trained for that; the teachers and other staff could be more easily trained in the 'simpler' task of static defense, and less risk of being misidentified if a/some LEO came into the building and spotted them 'lurking' around with a weapon in hand.
              IF the school has multiple full-time security team members, or more than one RSO in those districts that use on-duty LEO in that position, one of their primary responsibilities should be training to work together to clear and secure the building(s). If there is only one security or RSO, he/she should be trained and rehearsed in tactics that would be appropriate for a single officer--and when outside LEO shows up, the lone security officer--or the team--would (should?) be much more recognizable as to who they are.
              There's $.02 to spend any way you want. Ace2
              Cool. What techniques or tactics should they be trained in? Start with a single RSO/Officer then a team of the same.
              Failure is an opportunity to learn.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Ace View Post
                I'd certainly go along with the kids and staff having training and supplies to treat injuries, and there is nothing wrong with having armed staff on hand. Not sure I'd want that armed staff clearing the building; would much rather see them trained in 'forting up' in the classroom, with ability to secure doors/windows, position the kids in a safe, covered area in the room, and just cover the door to 'repel boarders' (if I can use a slightly facetious term here). Let the LEO's clear the building, do any searches that need done. They're the ones who are (or should be) trained for that; the teachers and other staff could be more easily trained in the 'simpler' task of static defense, and less risk of being misidentified if a/some LEO came into the building and spotted them 'lurking' around with a weapon in hand.
                IF the school has multiple full-time security team members, or more than one RSO in those districts that use on-duty LEO in that position, one of their primary responsibilities should be training to work together to clear and secure the building(s). If there is only one security or RSO, he/she should be trained and rehearsed in tactics that would be appropriate for a single officer--and when outside LEO shows up, the lone security officer--or the team--would (should?) be much more recognizable as to who they are.
                There's $.02 to spend any way you want. Ace2
                This makes sense.
                Taceant colloquia. Effugiat risus. Hic locus est ubi mors gaudet succurrere vitae.
                The Pale Horse available on Amazon for your digital reader.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ace View Post
                  I'd certainly go along with the kids and staff having training and supplies to treat injuries, and there is nothing wrong with having armed staff on hand. Not sure I'd want that armed staff clearing the building; would much rather see them trained in 'forting up' in the classroom, with ability to secure doors/windows, position the kids in a safe, covered area in the room, and just cover the door to 'repel boarders' (if I can use a slightly facetious term here). Let the LEO's clear the building, do any searches that need done. They're the ones who are (or should be) trained for that; the teachers and other staff could be more easily trained in the 'simpler' task of static defense, and less risk of being misidentified if a/some LEO came into the building and spotted them 'lurking' around with a weapon in hand.
                  IF the school has multiple full-time security team members, or more than one RSO in those districts that use on-duty LEO in that position, one of their primary responsibilities should be training to work together to clear and secure the building(s). If there is only one security or RSO, he/she should be trained and rehearsed in tactics that would be appropriate for a single officer--and when outside LEO shows up, the lone security officer--or the team--would (should?) be much more recognizable as to who they are.
                  There's $.02 to spend any way you want. Ace2
                  There are multiple reasons for keeping the LEO's OUT and using internal school security:

                  1. Incident Command System.The safety and security of the school is the school security team's job, they are the Incident Commanders, the first one's on the scene, and the most familiar with the school, faculty, staff and students.

                  2. Mistaken Identity. The school shooting in the report shows that teachers and students both got locked out of classrooms and restrooms, and were trapped in hallways. If you recall shortly after the incident, a student was misidentified as the shooter, and treated by LE as if he was the shooter. Fortunately, he was not shot, but had the situation been slightly different, he might have been. For example, the actual shooter ditched his AR and body armor. Had a student or faculty/staff member picked up the AR, and a LEO spotted him/her with it, they likely would have been shot to death by the LEO. Similarly, an armed security officer or CCW faculty/staff member could also be misidentified by LE and killed.

                  3. Intel. As I said earlier, the internal situation is going to be better known and understand by the people on the inside, than by LEO's on the outside.

                  4. Communications. School security will have effective comms that they use on a regular, continuous daily basis, whereas in the report, the officers once inside, could not communicate with each other. Likely their radios were on repeater frequencies that could not penetrate into the school. Had they been on a simplex frequency, they likely could have communicated. Not all LE agencies are going to practice in schools to make sure their comms work, whereas effective comms are a normal, daily occurrence among the school faculty and staff.

                  5. Time is of the essence! It takes too much time for LE to respond, make entry and clear a campus, regardless of how quickly they respond. School security is already in-place on-site, and can respond immediately, IF WELL TRAINED! Obviously, the school shooting in the report exposed the incompetence of this school's security personnel, CRIMINAL incompetence, IMO.

                  The roll of LE can be to assist with the training of the school security team and the CCW faculty and staff. The SRO (School Resource Officer) can be the head of the internal school security team, and liaison between the team and LE and EMS if it is practical.
                  http://youtu.be/ei8OK4WdoW0
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4CuH...e=channel_page
                  http://www.stoppingpower.net/comment...tervention.asp
                  http://youtu.be/wXwPtP-KDNk
                  https://youtu.be/Iy71umadb6k

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I can see all those points. And agreed that the on-site security, whether a single RSO/school guard or a team (I'd much prefer a team) should certainly be in command. But how much training and practice/rehearsal would it take for administrators and office types to be ready to take on the job of searching buildings the size of schools nowadays? I could see having them trained to post in a static defensive position, and help to direct the second responders in the search of the building. They could, possibly, also be a big help in dealing with those kids/staff who might get locked out of rooms, getting them together in a safe(er) location to wait for the situation to end. AND, if things happened to work out, maybe the threat would be identified and neutralized before the second responders arrived; then their job would be to 'mop up' (again, if I'm allowed to use that term).
                    In general, I'd rather see 'professionals' doing the actual job of searching out the bad guy(s)---and even some of those 'professionals' could be lacking in training and practice for such events. Desk wonks tend to have a 'Oh, that will never happen here' attitude, and not only about attacks on schools.

                    Too many issues to be solved on this site, and I'd venture a guess very few of us here will be consulted on the issue. Plus, if word got out that the admin staff at (pick a school) were spending time and resources to train and equip for such activities, how many parents and/or politicos would be horrified and mortified, and move to put a stop to it?

                    Fun discussion. Maybe we can keep it going and stay civil? Ace2
                    Last edited by Ace; 01-10-2019, 21:19. Reason: oops--spelled 'RSO' wrong. Danged digital dyslexia! Ace2 again
                    Sometimes the term 'Idiot' is a description and not an insult.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ace View Post
                      I can see all those points. And agreed that the on-site security, whether a single RSO/school guard or a team (I'd much prefer a team) should certainly be in command. But how much training and practice/rehearsal would it take for administrators and office types to be ready to take on the job of searching buildings the size of schools nowadays? I could see having them trained to post in a static defensive position, and help to direct the second responders in the search of the building. They could, possibly, also be a big help in dealing with those kids/staff who might get locked out of rooms, getting them together in a safe(er) location to wait for the situation to end. AND, if things happened to work out, maybe the threat would be identified and neutralized before the second responders arrived; then their job would be to 'mop up' (again, if I'm allowed to use that term).
                      In general, I'd rather see 'professionals' doing the actual job of searching out the bad guy(s)---and even some of those 'professionals' could be lacking in training and practice for such events. Desk wonks tend to have a 'Oh, that will never happen here' attitude, and not only about attacks on schools.

                      Too many issues to be solved on this site, and I'd venture a guess very few of us here will be consulted on the issue. Plus, if word got out that the admin staff at (pick a school) were spending time and resources to train and equip for such activities, how many parents and/or politicos would be horrified and mortified, and move to put a stop to it?

                      Fun discussion. Maybe we can keep it going and stay civil? Ace2
                      The key is in the school district's hiring of security personnel. Those hired should have some security related background, such as former LE, retired MP, etc.Also key will be the training and exercising of the security team and any CCW faculty and staff.

                      Technology will be a key factor as well, since real-time surveillance cameras with recording and dependable radio and PA comms are a must. If the security staff can monitor the shooter via surveillance cams and give movement reports to the entire school via PA system and radio, it will easily save lives as students, faculty and staff will know what areas to evacuate from/lock-down and what areas are safe to move in, as well as letting the security team know what area to target.

                      One thing that I did not address earlier, as I wasn't really attempting to give a full-blown security plan, and I'm still not, but just like our Southern Border, access control must be addressed. This will be very difficult, as most schools the focus in planning was to provide as much access as possible, and now that has to be reversed. The planning and cost of re-configuring a school and campus for security can be quite formidable, and in likely most cases, economically unfeasible.

                      BTW, I'm familiar with SRO (School Resource Officer), and only think of RSO as "Range Safety Officer". What does RSO stand for in your usage?
                      http://youtu.be/ei8OK4WdoW0
                      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4CuH...e=channel_page
                      http://www.stoppingpower.net/comment...tervention.asp
                      http://youtu.be/wXwPtP-KDNk
                      https://youtu.be/Iy71umadb6k

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Goodtime Charlie View Post

                        The key is in the school district's hiring of security personnel. Those hired should have some security related background, such as former LE, retired MP, etc.Also key will be the training and exercising of the security team and any CCW faculty and staff.

                        Technology will be a key factor as well, since real-time surveillance cameras with recording and dependable radio and PA comms are a must. If the security staff can monitor the shooter via surveillance cams and give movement reports to the entire school via PA system and radio, it will easily save lives as students, faculty and staff will know what areas to evacuate from/lock-down and what areas are safe to move in, as well as letting the security team know what area to target.

                        One thing that I did not address earlier, as I wasn't really attempting to give a full-blown security plan, and I'm still not, but just like our Southern Border, access control must be addressed. This will be very difficult, as most schools the focus in planning was to provide as much access as possible, and now that has to be reversed. The planning and cost of re-configuring a school and campus for security can be quite formidable, and in likely most cases, economically unfeasible.

                        BTW, I'm familiar with SRO (School Resource Officer), and only think of RSO as "Range Safety Officer". What does RSO stand for in your usage?
                        Private security would also be worthy of consideration as well, I'd think. There are some pretty crappy ones out there, but there are also some pretty good ones as well.
                        Taceant colloquia. Effugiat risus. Hic locus est ubi mors gaudet succurrere vitae.
                        The Pale Horse available on Amazon for your digital reader.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by gerhard1 View Post

                          Private security would also be worthy of consideration as well, I'd think. There are some pretty crappy ones out there, but there are also some pretty good ones as well.
                          Private security would be "security related background". Sorry if I was unclear in my statement.
                          http://youtu.be/ei8OK4WdoW0
                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4CuH...e=channel_page
                          http://www.stoppingpower.net/comment...tervention.asp
                          http://youtu.be/wXwPtP-KDNk
                          https://youtu.be/Iy71umadb6k

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Goodtime Charlie View Post
                            ..............................

                            BTW, I'm familiar with SRO (School Resource Officer), and only think of RSO as "Range Safety Officer". What does RSO stand for in your usage?
                            That was a mis-spelling of 'SRO'---digital dyslexia at work. (My only excuse is I was in a hurry.) Kinda like a Lefty--don't worry about what I said, go with what I mean. Ace2

                            Sometimes the term 'Idiot' is a description and not an insult.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Goodtime Charlie View Post

                              Private security would be "security related background". Sorry if I was unclear in my statement.
                              Not a problem, my erudite friend.
                              Taceant colloquia. Effugiat risus. Hic locus est ubi mors gaudet succurrere vitae.
                              The Pale Horse available on Amazon for your digital reader.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X