Debate over "lockdowns"

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZeSpectre

Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
5,502
Location
Deep in the valley
My wife and I got into quite a heated debate over the topic of school security and "lockdowns" last night. (Just FYI, the wife is a teacher so this is of some concern to us both).

I take the position that, since students and teachers are NOT emergency personnel trained to handle a situation, the only "emergency responses" they need are "STAY PUT" (if the greater threat is outside like a storm or tornado) or "GET OUT" (if the greater threat is inside like a gas leak or bomb).

This led to a pretty intense discussion over "lockdowns" when someone like a murder/shooter comes inside the school. I think it's absolutely insane to keep people inside where the threat is. My wife took the position that her (admittedly very young) students wouldn't know what to do "on their own" if they were simply told to flee the school.

I don't think we really reached any sort of agreement on this topic but I'd be very willing to hear arguments on either side of this topic.

Ze
 
When I was in High School ( last year) there was a general consensus that if someone came with a gun, the teachers could say all they want, but we, the students, were going out the windows. Our school was in a wide, open area and we would have rather taken our chances running. If there was any other type of alarm we would probably go along with what the teachers were saying, until we believed we could handle the situation better.

I think it is very insulting to assume high school students would not know what to do if someone came into a school shooting. It is pretty natural instinct to run. Grade school age kids are not stupid. I think many older people including teachers would be surprised of kid's intelligence. Most people confuse immaturity with intelligence. Just because someone finds shooting spitballs or throwing food funny does not mean they don't know when they are in danger.
 
I hate these conversations. All I can think about is my 4 year old son in his pre-school :(
I would say if his teacher told him to run he would.
 
I've always had mixed feelings on it. Staying put in a classroom makes you a sitting duck. then again, hundreds of students streaming out of a doorway also makes them sitting ducks. But I think te majority of shootings (maybe all) have had the shooter(s) both inside the school or outside, but not both. If there are gunmen in and outside of the school, unless you are armed or lucky you are in serious trouble.
 
My wife is a Middle School English Teacher, so this has been a debate for us as well.

At first, I was against lockdowns due to the fear of just providing cornered prey to the predator. But, when you stop and think through it, lockdowns are probably the best first step. The reasons are: 1) if you hear shots you don't know how many people are involved, 2) you ususally don't know where they are, 3) you don't know if there are more waiting out in the play ground to shoot kids as they come out, 4) you simply just don't know enough to make a good decision.

Putting kids out into the hallways in front of an active shooter just makes it easier for them shoot more kids. If it just an ex spouse out to get even, the kids are probably safer staying in their rooms with the door locked.

But, there should be a second code that can be broadcast to tell everyone to run for it if worse comes to worse. If there are four or five bad guys systematically going room to room breaking down doors (Breslan) you are better off taking risks and running than staying put. But, people on third and fourth floors are going to be screwed no matter what.

I have reluctantly decided that there is no "Best" answer, but locking down is probably the best first step (followed by active thinking) in the majority of most likely situations.

Just my opinion.
George
 
In an active shooter scenario, lockdowns are a logical first step and I agree with george_co that there needs to be a code word that triggers an immediate evacuation via any means necessary. I believe a simple solution exists for multiple story buildings and they are standard rope ladders and fire escapes - these are logical low cost alternatives that every kid regardless of age would know how to use.

In regard to fire precautions, a similar system could be used to contain a shooter as there is to contain a fire - fire doors. In the event of a fire, these doors are timed to close in a certain amount of time. It would not be hard to rig them to close instantly, thus trapping the shooter.
 
In regard to fire precautions, a similar system could be used to contain a shooter as there is to contain a fire - fire doors. In the event of a fire, these doors are timed to close in a certain amount of time. It would not be hard to rig them to close instantly, thus trapping the shooter.

Mantraps... like some jewelery stores have. Now THAT might be a good idea.
 
No course of action will be right 100% of the time. In one school shooting the shooter waited outside to shoot students as they left the building, so a lockdown would have been better. In others the shooter goes room to room, so running would be better.
 
Fire doors close, but they don't lock. In fact, in most cases, a fire alarm will drop the magnets on all locked doors, interior and exterior.
 
What about Colleges?

This thread seems to be about K-12.

What about Colleges? How do you lock down 26,000 students (many of them commuters) on a 30,000 acres campus, with over 100 buildings?

What good would it have been to lock the VT shooter in his dorm with 400-600 student, when he lock himself in an academic building with under 100?

Will lock downs and class cancelling become the "bomb threats" of this decade?

More of these incidence and it might help our cause.

An Appalachian State University senior was attempting to avoid paying for a damaged apartment door by fabricating a story of a masked gunman

Check out:

="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...,5498486.story"
 
Dave Hicks said: More of these incidence and it might help our cause.

I don't care if it helps, hurts, or is politically neutral to our cause. I'd rather not have another mass shooting, ever. What a terrible thing to say.

The difference between us and our opponents is our opinion on how to cease these things from happening. Hunker down and wait (and don't fight back) seemed to work for airline hijackings, up until the point it didn't work anymore. Those looking to do harm figured out that strategy's weakness and exploited it.

Those looking to do mass harm have figured out that gun-free zones provide dense concentrations of unarmed victims. Until we have leaders and policy makers willing to sit down and consider every option, even if that option goes against their worldview, we won't make forward progress on the problem.


Button up and hunker down policies work to limit and contain the damage up until the point they get exploited.
 
"Lockdowns" were invented by the same people that came up with the genius idea of "Gun Free Zones".

Its not about safety, its not about saving lives, its about control.
 
My wife took the position that her (admittedly very young) students wouldn't know what to do "on their own" if they were simply told to flee the school.
I think that problem could be overcome with drills, just like they do for a fire emergency.

My cousin is a teacher and she is aware of a police department that ran a couple scenarios and found that there were fewer casualties in the case where the students ran for the exits as fast as they could compared to the case where they did a lockdown scenario.

But I also remember the case years ago of the kids that set off the fire alarm and then waited outside and shot kids as they came out.
 
This thread seems to be about K-12.

He mentioned that the students were very young so we are probably talking about pre High School here so likely pre-teens and younger. Trying to herd a bunch of scared kids with gun shots going off would I imagine be worse than trying to herd cats. So staying put makes a lot of sense.

I have reluctantly decided that there is no "Best" answer, but locking down is probably the best first step (followed by active thinking) in the majority of most likely situations.

True. The problem with staying put is that without a means to stop the intruder staying put, puts everyone at risk to becoming an easy target. Those nuts in Colorado brought bombs, and while that may be an extreme case it should not be discounted that in a planned coordinated assault the attackers might bring breaching gear as well. Especially if they were aware of the school security plan, which they most likely would be.

No SWAT in the history of school/ public shootings has ever arrived in time to either stop the attackers; or when they did arrive in time to stop the attackers, take action in time to stop the attackers.

The only things that have stopped the shooters have been CCWs, private armed guards and running out of ammo/suicide. Certainly the last is not a good option. We all know what the correct answer to reslove the issue is but that will never fly through the school board, so where does that leave us? Private Guards.

If you force the school board to evaluate the cost of private armed guards suffcient to stop an attack maybe they will consider the correct answer. At least until someone comes up with a better way, because I know of none.
 
It depends a bit on the building/s involved. If its a one room school house its much different then a sprawling campus with dozens of buildings. It also depends on the "fortifications" if you will. Does the school have locking classroom doors? Are they heavy metal doors or glorified closet doors? A lot of variables and no easy answers.
 
Well, as a current college student (and moderately recent high school student), I've thought quite a bit about what should be done in such an event.

Personally, I don't much care what the teacher/professor says, and didn't in high school, either. If something is happening, I'm bugging out ASAP, and whoever wants to come along is welcome (and if they want to hide under their desks, then luck to 'em).

I was in high school during the Columbine incident, and even before that the idea of a shooting rampage was not foreign to me. I decided that the staff and faculty could say what they will, but my life is my own; they can expel me if I live, but in the mean time I'm looking out for number 1. I more or less assumed that whoever was "in charge" of the students would be ordering them to stay put, "duck and cover", or whatever. Hunkering down in a classroom waiting for either the situation to resolve itself, or to be gunned down, is not my idea of a good idea. I may be more vulnerable outside to a degree, but at least I can try to see danger coming and run away, or take cover and evade, or even see if I can't get in close enough to grapple with a gunman. I reached my current height of about 6 feet when I was 13, in late 8th grade, so it wasn't too ridiculous a thought, if I were desperate enough.

Now that I'm in college, the plan hasn't changed much. If I could arm myself, then I might feel better about staying put, or actually shepherding the students in my class and maybe nearby classes to safety, as at least I could offer some protection. However, since my armament at school is limited to a folding knife and, sometimes, OC, there's little I can do against a gunman except die, unless I can get really close. So the plan now is pretty much to book out to wherever I parked (usually across a few hundred yards of mostly open ground). I don't like it much, but there aren't many options.

On a more general level, I have a few ideas of what the response ought to be, assuming that the schools don't actually do anything helpful like let us carry or post armed, roving patrols (the latter is not my idea of conducive to an institution of learning, anyway).

Lockdowns, as has been said by others, would be a good start. The problem is that, in any such situation, it's highly doubtful that anyone will know what's going on until it's all over, if then. Even in the classrooms that have working intercoms or wall phones (about even up in high school; probably 10% or less in my college), I'd bet $20 to your dollar that there isn't a protocol in my school, or most schools, for contacting individual classrooms or using the PA system for instruction. Similarly, I would bet that in most schools there is either no functioning alarm, or a single alarm system for everything; drill, fire, earthquake, nuclear strike, or terrorist incident. The most that I could really hope for is to hear an alarm, that could mean anything.

Naturally, my personal response to any such alarm, drill or no, is high-tail it to my car and drive on home, and then have a drink to steady my nerves while I see if the local news says anything about it.

I've heard of some schools using automated calls to a list of student cell phones, warning them of the incident. Or even e-mails. I doubt either solution is at all effective. Personally, I don't even carry my cell phone to class. Most probably do, but during class they're going to be shut off. Similarly, e-mails are only going to warn those that haven't come in yet, and that happen to check their e-mail before doing so. Either is almost totally useless.

The only thing I can realistically see schools doing is putting in better communications and instituting emergency protocols, and I doubt they'll do that.

So, as I was saying, lockdowns would be a good start, except that it's doubtful any information will be forthcoming. So, I would think that an orderly evacuation protocol would be superior. Better still would be a general order to "Get out and go home"; orderly columns make wonderful targets, as several hundred years of Napoleonic infantry tactics has proven. A fleeing mob is less orderly, and therefore (ironically) safer. However, for pre-teen students and younger, an orderly evacuation is probably the better bet, so kids don't go wandering off (I likely would have anyway, but I'm contrary like that).

Not that it matters much to me, as I'll be out the door and down the street before the professor can say "We're going to head outside to our designated evacuation site in an orderly fashion." No thanks, I'll be in my car.
 
No SWAT in the history of school/ public shootings has ever arrived in time to either stop the attackers; or when they did arrive in time to stop the attackers, take action in time to stop the attackers.



funny statement that first part
 
I take the position that, since students and teachers are NOT emergency personnel trained to handle a situation, the only "emergency responses" they need are "STAY PUT"

All the people that died in the towers on 911 were told the same thing.
 
Walking Arsenal, if you are going to quote me then finish reading the sentence. I list responses, plural.
I take the position that, since students and teachers are NOT emergency personnel trained to handle a situation, the only "emergency responses" they need are "STAY PUT" (if the greater threat is outside like a storm or tornado) or "GET OUT" (if the greater threat is inside like a gas leak or bomb).

Obviously I consider most situations a "GET OUT" scenario.

Just to clarify for this specific conversation
-Pre-Teens
-Medium sized school (looooong open hallways)
-Pretty sturdy fire-doors for the classrooms (have to give the school credit there).

Plans my wife and I have discussed and/or put in place.
1) We bought a bunch of "door wedges" and tested them on her classroom door. She can do it quick and when they were wedged in place around the frame I couldn't force the door open even with the latch disengaged (I'm NOT a small guy) Eventually I could probably break in but it would take time and some serious effort so shooting the lock wouldn't give easy access to the room and attempting entry would give those inside a LOT of advance notice.

2) We looked around her classroom as it sat and went over all of the items on hand and how they could be used if necessary (books, pointers, desks, chairs, the overhead projector (shined in eyes), extension cords (as whips or to trip up or bind someone)

3) We bought her a nice big "dust type" extinguisher that could be used to obscure sight, and could also be used to hit someone if needed.

4) We discussed HOW the students wait in the room (crouched and ready to move vs sitting/laying on the floor waiting for something to happen).

One nice thing is her entrance door is recessed with a closet on either side so you have a very limited field of view into the room from the hallway.

I still dislike the lockdown idea though.
 
NO pepper spray (we asked)

Yes teachers can have a cell phone (supposed to be in vibrate during class hours). She has one.

Thanks for the suggestions.
 
No SWAT in the history of school/ public shootings has ever arrived in time to either stop the attackers; or when they did arrive in time to stop the attackers, take action in time to stop the attackers.

I take that back, one time. In the Tyler Courthouse shooting, the team leader arrived in time to take the shooter down (after the shooter had fired quite a lot of shots). Not only is this the only example I can think of it is very ironic as I know the team leader quite well.

Those are all great ideas as usual Ze, but we still have no way to disable an armed attacker. So we are hoping he will move on to easier prey. I would consider adding some "baseball gear" to the walls of the class room. Maybe a "sports wall" with various different sporting goods could help. I can think of lots of sporting goods that would come in very handy and it would be better than hiding under desks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top