Dealing with a Campus Shooter

Status
Not open for further replies.

LibShooter

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
776
Location
East Tennessee
Just saw a story on our local Fox affiliate about high school students learning how to protect themselves from a campus shooter. We saw a classroom full of kids pelting the gunman with books and backpacks and then charging him en masse.

Since, realistically, K-12 schools will be declared "Gun Free Zones" for a while, do you guys have any thoughts on training like this? Would you want your children to take the class? Could it do any good?
 
+1

what's the alternative? Hide behind your desks for concealment and hope the shooter thinks they are cover? In all honesty I don't see the training of pitting a classroom of children against an armed intruder as being life saving material for them while in that grade. I do do see it as a goo life lesson for them later in life once they are bigger and stronger. Lesson: don't be sheep. Dying in the fetal position while in fear is the same as dying on your feet charging an aggressor, except the one charging at least has a chance.
 
Better than laying down in a corner to be shot . . .

Yep, the instructor said something like "The kids have two choices: wait to be shot hiding under their desks or maybe getting shot trying to save their lives."

Kind of heartwarming to see this being taught in a public school. Tennessee is on its way to having pretty sane laws and public attitudes about firearms.
 
If you corner a mouse, it will bite you.

Better to go down swinging that cower and rely on the good graces of a deranged gunman. Although I'd feel much better about armed and trained faculty than kids throwing classroom materials.

Considering that eighty percent of people shot with handguns survive, it's much better odds to be a moving and agressive opponent than a static and passive target awaiting multiple gunshots.
 
Lame that there is no carry at schools for teachers etc.

Could reverse engineer it, what about body armor? Perhaps a half a kevlar vest with its ceramic plate inside a book bag. Could reasonably charge the attacker with that and maybe get a clinch going. Might get belly shot or leg shot though too.

I just carried myself, even in high school. Better judged by 12 than carried by six.
 
Can you picture the pioneers telling their kids to just hide and wait on the (bear, mountain lion, indians, or whatever) to leave-
 
Yep, the instructor said something like "The kids have two choices: wait to be shot hiding under their desks or maybe getting shot trying to save their lives."

I know I'm probably preaching the the choir here, but they say stuff like this, but as a society we don't give the tools for protection. :(
 
I just carried myself, even in high school.
I graduated in 1987 and could probably have got away with packing a gun on my person ... still don't think I'd recommend it (especially in this day and age).

I did have a 12ga floating around the trunk of my car most of my senior year ... but it wasn't really there for self defense or anything.

I did carry a Buck knife in my pocket ... wasn't anything back then but now days it would be grounds for expulsion/arrest/re-education camp
 
Back in my day we measured Soviet Targets in distance of miles from the school house and were sent to duck cover drills based on the locations of these targets. We also had NIKE missile batteries in our area at the time so... life was pretty orderly.

Thank god I got out of the sheep gun free zones when I did while the getting was good. If Im still in school today I'd be packing. I envision a scenario where the teacher is shot dead first and the rest of the class gathering in the most distant corner like a bunch of meekrats trying to stay in the bottom of the pile.
 
With the perceived uptick in school shootings, I've actually considered a very controversial option: Carry anyway. It's not a problem unless you get caught and if the day came when I needed to use it to save my life or the lives of my classmates/professors, I would rather be alive and in jail, than dead. I'm staunchly "Anti-Gun Free Zones" because they are statistically proven to be useless.
Better to be alive and ask for foregiveness with the knowledge that you saved your life and possibly the lives of others.
I don't know, it's tough - I wrestle with this a lot.
 
With the perceived uptick in school shootings, I've actually considered a very controversial option: Carry anyway.

But know your state law. In PA, public schools are a huge grey area, but it's legal on private property, like most universities.

Better to be alive in jail and essentially have your life ruined (especially if you were only caught with a gun, not caught because you stopped a shooting), or be alive but have it on your conscience that you maybe could have stopped the guy?

Not an easy choice.
 
To be a contrarian - these programs are a shill or cover to avoid the issue of carry on campus. They propose a suicide charge at a gunman rather than an efficacious response with a firearm.

Yes, folks have disarmed the gunman after the first wave of killings and the dude is reloading. That's brave and noble and good. After 20 or so shot.

But be aware that such problems are trying to cover up the need for carry at schools.

I've been involved in a couple of simulations. If a rampage shooter with some competence walks into a classroom of typical lecture size, he will shoot 10s of people before the charge of the laptop and fountain pen brigade gets to him. Cho did it. Shot some guy charging him. In simulation, a shooter can get off 7 to 10 shots before you can get out your chair and stand up - this is with knowledge of an attack coming. You can draw and shoot much quicker than that.

Thus, I don't support such programs as they are propaganda efforts to divert from the real issue. The efficacious way to stop a rampage shooter is to have a competent shooter engage him quickly.

If I have to charge and frisbee the laptop of death - I don't need a class in that.

Sorry to rant. I'm in the business and hear this crap. Get a txt message, huddle in the corner, blah, blah.
 
1. Read the first hand accounts of survivors. Virginia Tech is one I suggest.

The reality is, all one can really share, is their experiences and observations.

So one would be wise to investigate and verify for themselves, thus first hand accounts will offer more true and accurate insights, than MSM, Movies, Video Games and Internet BS.


2. Society started being dumbed down by LBJ and The Great Society. Now I do not know if any civil actions have been taken against any school boards, still I have to wonder if class action suits would assist in changing the "submit" and "no weapons" on campus policies.

I grew up in an era with some heavy stuff going on, and we carried knives to school, and guns too.
We did not have problems.
It was when society allowed itself to be controlled and manipulated with restrictions, problems occurred.


3. Yes. I have been on campus, more than once, when there was a shooting, a bomb threat, or some other "serious situation".

No, I am not going to share. There was time I have, not anymore, not on public forum.
Maybe in private with someone that really wants it.


Instead, folks need to investigate, verify for themselves. Even if it costs them money, like taking a class , or getting private lessons, or expense to go see, or have someone come in to speak qualified , or a survivor.

4. You teach people how to treat you.

The Great Dumbed Down Society has taught criminals campuses are easier targets.
Just as it has other "restricted" areas.

Now our fellow members in the UK, and similar, tried to share with those in the USA, but instead members ignored, or posted "move to the US".
The same things are happening in the US, in regard to gun and knife laws. The same playbook is being used.


Members have taught many instructors, qualified professionals, and members to not participate on THR, and other forums.\
The reality is, one cannot change people places and things, the only thing they can change, is themselves.

Another reality is, folks will not change, until something tragic happens to them, or someone close to them.

There are many levels of "hitting bottom" , it is your choice as to how low you choose to go, before your butt will not bounce anymore.

You can investigate, verify, seek quality information from survivors, and professionals, or you can stick your head in the sand.

Or you could do more harm sitting in your armchair and quarterback from the safety behind a monitor, and spew bull chips from your figment of an imagination.


And did they get you to trade
Your heros for ghosts?
Hot ashes for trees?
Hot air for a cool breeze?
Cold comfort for change?
And did you exchange
A walk on part in the war
For a lead role in a cage?
-Pink Floyd, Wish You Were Here.

.
 
Last edited:
Here is a simple answer. Give the teacher the key to a lockbox containing a short shotgun in each classroom. The teacher can then fight back with the same level of force as the gunman. You would think if schools took that kind of measure the gunman would think twice before he'd even try to shoot anyone.
 
While I agree that this is, essentially, avoiding the real issue of giving the adults the option or equal armamanet, it is a move in the right direction. I didn’t see the show, but I doubt the tactics were “wait until the shooter comes in the room, then get up out of your desk & rush him.” A couple motivated & crudely armed people, with good mindset & tactics could set up a pretty effective hasty ambush for an active shooter.

There is no one size fits all answer for picking up this turd but if you look around & use your head you can probably manage to keep the stink off your fingers.
 
This may get me put on some people's crap list, but I don't really trust firearms in the hands of teachers, especially not any of the teachers I know.

Nor do I like the idea of putting a firearm into a classroom full of children, or even worse, adult-sized adolescents. Yes, you might be well-armed against an attack, but you've introduced a gun into a room full of children. That could lead to an attack, rather than prevent one.

Off the bat, you create problems with the teacher retaining the gun, keeping the gun secure, likelihood of an ND (even police have NDs -- sometimes on school campuses -- so what makes you think teachers wouldn't?).

The simplest solution is to put a police officer in every school to respond to violence of any sort, not just gun-related. Our children are worth that much, at least.
 
do you guys have any thoughts on training like this? Would you want your children to take the class? Could it do any good?

my thoughts if my child were in high school now, Teach my daughter how to dive out a window, getting out beats confrontation, its not very brave but at least she will be coming home. I would want my daughter to take to class a good attitude, her books, and an awareness of her suroundings. Any thing is better than nothing However the chances of your kid getting killed in a car wreck are far greater than being shot in school. So mention what you will but concentrate on the real threats to their lives.
 
Joe:

For one thing, I don't know you.

Second, unlike a policeman, you're not trained and sworn to protect the public and uphold the law.

By all means, protect your own children with your own gun. But understand my reservations in allowing you to protect mine.
 
I'm a teacher. Tell me exactly why I'm untrustworthy.
1. I dont know you
2. teachers are people and people tend to be the following but not limited to, rapist terrorist arsonist drunks murders and wreckless drivers. On the other hand there are some good people too, see my point?
3. your gun safety resume is not in my hand
4. and even asking why your not trustworthy implies your hideing something making you untrustworthy

Now maybe your a great person but trust is earned not automaticaly given. Time is the only thing that can make you trustworthy.
 
That is indeed a puzzlement; you trust teachers enough to leave your kids with them all day, 9 months a year, for 13 years.
You trust teachers enough for us to have the legal status of in loco parentis.
You trust teachers enough for you to let us get shot dead along with your kids in the event of a campus shooting.

I trust you, AC, so much that I'll let you in on a little secret: In the event of a campus shooter, I'm not going to do [anything] to protect your kid. You see fit to deny me the most effective tool to protect your kid and myself because you "don't trust" me. In the event of a campus shooter, that doesn't leave me much choice other than to hope your kid gets chosen as a target first and occupies the shooter long enough for me to escape.

Remember, AC old sock, I'm not trustworthy in your opinion; so I figure I don't owe you or your kid [anything], much less taking a bullet. Good luck to your kid; I'm looking out for number one so that I can go home to my own kid. Too bad for your kid that his daddy leaves him in the care of people who can't be trusted.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
you trust teachers enough to leave your kids with them all day, 9 months a year, for 13 years.
two words for you

HOME and SCHOOL:neener:

You trust teachers enough for you to let us get shot dead along with your kids in the event of a campus shooting.
we all got to go one way or another, if it does happen that way you should be honored to die with her, she is an incredible little girl.

Joe in all honesty your responce was uncalled for, we all have a job to do part of yours on one level or another is to protect children, like it or not. And BTW you asked, I dont understand why your so upset over the responce. AND ITS JUST THE INTERNET.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top