Active Shooter Teenager Self Defense

[Steve]

According to Wikipedia, we've had 4 incidents in March, where 7 people (2 parents, 1 hospital employee and 4 kids) were killed. This is on top of the 17 killed and 14 injured in February in Parkland, and follows a long list of others. While I'm sure many here have opinions on these incidents, the point of this isn't political. It's practical.

The list is growing, as is the rate of occurrence, and the severity of the loss of life. List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia

This weekend, in response to the marches and such going on across the country, Rick Santorum said, “How about kids instead of looking to someone else to solve their problem, do something about maybe taking CPR classes or trying to deal with situations that when there is a violent shooter that you can actually respond to that."

Rick Santorum: Students should learn CPR, not seek gun laws

So, how about it? Is CPR the most effective self defense we can teach kids? What actions can teenagers take that will make them safer in school if one of their classmates decides to come to school with dad's AR-15? What does "effective self defense" look like in American schools these days?

 

[hoshin1600]

the problem is that these are kids. they are under the protective mantle of the school. schools dont like kids thinking for themselves , especially in a situation like this. they want to herd sheep not cats. under their own discretion the kids would run in every direction, jump out windows or who knows what. the teachers herd all the kids to stand in a corner and "hide", or some such decision policy made from a swivel chair.
there are a couple of programs out there that teach the kids to yell and throw pencils and books at the killer but this is mostly a feel good exercise without actual effectiveness.
any EMT out there can correct me but i dont think CPR is very effective for gun shot wounds. how to apply a tourniquet would at least be helpful, if not a protective measure.
for the most part my own logic says what we are doing is all wrong. why do schools have fire alarms that are wired direct to the fire house where the response time is as short as possible but for a school shooting we depend on someone with a cell phone calling 911?
i think gun legislation is political so i wont comment on it other that say that the chances of it being a good solution is not very high. it hasnt passed thus far so lets stop fighting over it and focus on what we can do.
where is the bullet proof glass? hospitals now have armed guards and segmented entry way rooms that only open via a guard, why isnt this applied to schools?

 

[mrt2]

the problem is that these are kids. they are under the protective mantle of the school. schools dont like kids thinking for themselves , especially in a situation like this. they want to herd sheep not cats. under their own discretion the kids would run in every direction, jump out windows or who knows what. the teachers herd all the kids to stand in a corner and "hide", or some such decision policy made from a swivel chair.
there are a couple of programs out there that teach the kids to yell and throw pencils and books at the killer but this is mostly a feel good exercise without actual effectiveness.
any EMT out there can correct me but i dont think CPR is very effective for gun shot wounds. how to apply a tourniquet would at least be helpful, if not a protective measure.
for the most part my own logic says what we are doing is all wrong. why do schools have fire alarms that are wired direct to the fire house where the response time is as short as possible but for a school shooting we depend on someone with a cell phone calling 911?
i think gun legislation is political so i wont comment on it other that say that the chances of it being a good solution is not very high. it hasnt passed thus far so lets stop fighting over it and focus on what we can do.
where is the bullet proof glass? hospitals now have armed guards and segmented entry way rooms that only open via a guard, why isnt this applied to schools?

To a certain extent, what you would do in the event of a fire and what you would do in the event of an active shooter are sort of opposite. And that applies not just to SOP, but to building design.

If you wanted to design schools to prevent or minimize casualties, you could design schools like you might design prisons. One gate in and out, installation of metal detectors, minimal windows, ability to lock down the entire school. It would come at a cost, of course. It is hard enough psychologically on prisoners and staff, one can only imagine the effect on young impressionable minds.

 

[lklawson]

This weekend, in response to the marches and such going on across the country, Rick Santorum said, “How about kids instead of looking to someone else to solve their problem, do something about maybe taking CPR classes or trying to deal with situations that when there is a violent shooter that you can actually respond to that."

Rick Santorum: Students should learn CPR, not seek gun laws

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...ot-seek-gun-laws/ar-BBKGGmp?OCID=ansmsnnews11
Well, he has a point. Statistically, what's more likely, a heart attack or a "school shooting?"

So, how about it? Is CPR the most effective self defense we can teach kids? What actions can teenagers take that will make them safer in school if one of their classmates decides to come to school with dad's AR-15?

Hyperbole? Statistically speaking AR's aren't the most common choice. That said...

What does "effective self defense" look like in American schools these days?

Sure. I just wrote an article on this.

The First Rule is... MOVE!

The synopsis is "move laterally and to cover because a moving target is a lot harder for anyone, particularly the poorly trained, to hit and cover is, well cover." I threw in some statistics and studies to support the thesis.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Buka]

Scary, important subject. But I'm going to refrain from it, otherwise I'll eventually get all political.

 

[hoshin1600]

To a certain extent, what you would do in the event of a fire and what you would do in the event of an active shooter are sort of opposite. And that applies not just to SOP, but to building design.

If you wanted to design schools to prevent or minimize casualties, you could design schools like you might design prisons. One gate in and out, installation of metal detectors, minimal windows, ability to lock down the entire school. It would come at a cost, of course. It is hard enough psychologically on prisoners and staff, one can only imagine the effect on young impressionable minds.

you somewhat missed the direction of my post.

1. schools have fire alarms that are direct to fire responders why do we not a alarms to notify police responders? we have tremendous technology but we dont apply it.
2. hospitals are budgeting millions in security measures like bullet proof glass and multiple entry doors that open by guards to prevent unwanted aggressors from coming in the building. they dont look like a prison, they are modern and classy. if hospitals can do it so can schools. politicians just have to budget the money.

 

[Steve]

Yeah, not interested in the politics... at least not in this thread or on this forum. The real question is about self defense. To try and clarify, the point Santorum made was to suggest that the kids do something more constructive, like CPR training.

I appreciate the article @lklawson . In the article, the emphasis seems to be simply to move to cover... with the coda of "return fire." Are you saying that there is no real training that would benefit a teenager? Running, and looking for cover seems very sensible, and I've seen many articles recently that discuss a shift from the "lockdown" mentality to more of a "get the hell out fast" one. But I don't know that this would require a lot of training. Returning fire doesn't seem practical or advisable.

If you guys were going to create a "self defense" course for teenagers with the goal of reducing their risk in an active shooter situation, what else might you include beyond the above?

Also, to clarify, in an effort to avoid the politics, I suggest we consider schools as they are and focus on things the kids can do for themselves. If we get into other things, such as school planning/construction, arming teachers, or changing gun laws, this will surely stray into politics.

 

[Steve]

you somewhat missed the direction of my post.

1. schools have fire alarms that are direct to fire responders why do we not a alarms to notify police responders? we have tremendous technology but we dont apply it.
2. hospitals are budgeting millions in security measures like bullet proof glass and multiple entry doors that open by guards to prevent unwanted aggressors from coming in the building. they dont look like a prison, they are modern and classy. if hospitals can do it so can schools. politicians just have to budget the money.

Hey, I appreciate your points, but as I say above, I am hoping to hear some ideas people will have about self defense. I think if we get into modifying school buildings, or discussing other things that adults can do, we will inevitably run afoul of the moderators.

So, again, the comment from Santorum was that the kids should do something for themselves. What might that be?

 

[CB Jones]

Hey, I appreciate your points, but as I say above, I am hoping to hear some ideas people will have about self defense. I think if we get into modifying school buildings, or discussing other things that adults can do, we will inevitably run afoul of the moderators.

So, again, the comment from Santorum was that the kids should do something for themselves. What might that be?

The only thing I could ask kids to do is...if you hear or see something report it.

 

[hoshin1600]

Hey, I appreciate your points, but as I say above, I am hoping to hear some ideas people will have about self defense. I think if we get into modifying school buildings, or discussing other things that adults can do, we will inevitably run afoul of the moderators.

So, again, the comment from Santorum was that the kids should do something for themselves. What might that be?

i understand about the mods and i agree. but i do not honestly feel there is anything that children even up to high school can really do. college is different. at that age and situation we are looking at the guide lines of the FBI hide, run, fight program.

 

[pdg]

Firstly, that guy recommending CPR - it's painfully obvious that he knows less about trauma first aid than I know about interpretive dance.

I suppose there are worse things than CPR you could do to a gunshot victim, like you could shoot them again, or maybe stab them...

Any of this type of measure (first aid training, encouraging people to arm themselves, etc.) isn't even thinking about addressing the problem though - car insurance doesn't stop your car being stolen.

Neither do the protective measures like bulletproof glass or secure entry - I mean, in a fire situation everything would open for efficient evacuation and everyone would go outside right? So just set off a fire alarm and wait somewhere outside the fire escape with your gun...

So, the next option is gun control...

I don't believe that will work.

Look at how strict gun control is in the UK, people still get shot. Enough that there are dedicated armed response police. If 'our' model of control worked fully, we wouldn't need those, a stick and a whistle would be plenty.

It's either uninvent guns (erm...) or control them to such a degree that they might as well not exist. Even then, it's only restricting the tooling.

Neither of those are viable either.


What needs looking at is why these shooters go on a shooting rampage in the first place. Why does society breed that mindset? What is it that makes these people think it's a good plan to go kill a load of other people?

That's the real problem that (apparently) nobody will admit to - and because it's not admitted it can't be addressed.

From the amount of reports, it's hardly justifiable to say it's just the occasional nutjob.

 

[drop bear]

Every solution that involves the participants effecting their own defence would be catastrophic.

So you could dog pile the guy and probably get him. And you could raise your odds by hiding around a corner or somethings. But you could also loose a few people doing it. And in this case of course you are loosing school children.

Monash Uni as an example.
Monash University shooting - Wikipedia

So it could be done but It would be a hard sell to the parents though

The self defence solution is kind of a scam. And people did this to me constantly.

Put me on my own in a pub with 50 guys. Now I probably cant take two guys and not turn it in to a horrible mess. But if the onus was on me then nobody had to solve violence issues in any meaningfull way.

Now logically you would look at the risk figure out how to reasonably reduce it and then set up systems that have a hope of working.

Eg. People fall off roofs you set up scaffolding.

The self defence solution is of course done backwards.

They see the risk and for insanely suggest that the individual can mysteriously solve unsolvable problems with training or by being heroic.

Eg. People fall off roofs. His climbing ability was the issue.

So yeah you can adress the problem in this manner but be prepared to have people die because of it.

 

[hoshin1600]

So, the next option is gun control...

as @Steve has said lets not get into that arena. the mods will lock the thread.

What needs looking at is why these shooters go on a shooting rampage in the first place. Why does society breed that mindset? What is it that makes these people think it's a good plan to go kill a load of other people?

first off society doesnt breed this mind set. in almost every single case it has been a result of mental illness that was not addressed. many psychologists understand this person very well its not something we have to "look into" its well understood. the problem is a lack of addressing the metal health issues in the US. as a society we have determined that locking people up in mental institutions against their will is a bad idea. as a result we closed all but a few facilities that were capable to handle the issue and we are paying the price for that decision.

 

[hoshin1600]

Every solution that involves the participants effecting their own defence would be catastrophic.

So you could dog pile the guy and probably get him. And you could raise your odds by hiding around a corner or somethings. But you could also loose a few people doing it. And in this case of course you are loosing school children.

Monash Uni as an example.
Monash University shooting - Wikipedia

So it could be done but It would be a hard sell to the parents though

The self defence solution is kind of a scam. And people did this to me constantly.

Put me on my own in a pub with 50 guys. Now I probably cant take two guys and not turn it in to a horrible mess. But if the onus was on me then nobody had to solve violence issues in any meaningfull way.

Now logically you would look at the risk figure out how to reasonably reduce it and then set up systems that have a hope of working.

Eg. People fall off roofs you set up scaffolding.

The self defence solution is of course done backwards.

They see the risk and for insanely suggest that the individual can mysteriously solve unsolvable problems with training or by being heroic.

Eg. People fall off roofs. His climbing ability was the issue.

So yeah you can adress the problem in this manner but be prepared to have people die because of it.

i am not sure if your using sarcasm or serious.
the clip you posted did show a successful disarm of the killer. that is what adults should do if in the situation of being responsible for children but i think the OP was specific to responses from minors in self defense.

 

[pdg]

as @Steve has said lets not get into that arena. the mods will lock the thread.

In fairness, I did 'argue' both sides and came down on the side that it's not worth pursuing.

first off society doesnt breed this mind set. in almost every single case it has been a result of mental illness that was not addressed. many psychologists understand this person very well its not something we have to "look into" its well understood. the problem is a lack of addressing the metal health issues in the US. as a society we have determined that locking people up in mental institutions against their will is a bad idea. as a result we closed all but a few facilities that were capable to handle the issue and we are paying the price for that decision.

But that fundamentally agrees it's a societal issue. That it's the root cause of the problem not being addressed.

To refuse to do anything about people who pose a real threat to others is to deny that it's a problem. It might be understood, but if that understanding isn't acted on what's the point?

There are other societies around the world with easy access to firearms and they don't appear to suffer from the same problems.

 

[drop bear]

i am not sure if your using sarcasm or serious.
the clip you posted did show a successful disarm of the killer. that is what adults should do if in the situation of being responsible for children but i think the OP was specific to responses from minors in self defense.

The situation as presented is quite simply madness. And so the solutions are mad. If every single person attacks the gunman at once. You will have more chance of success. Sorry about the victims a bullet proof door might have saved.

What is your better solution?

 

[hoshin1600]

The situation as presented is quite simply madness. And so the solutions are mad. If every single person attacks the gunman at once. You will have more chance of success. Sorry about the victims a bullet proof door might have saved.

What is your better solution?

as usual i am at a total failure to understand your point. maybe i am missing something. i will agree numbers matter if your talking about attacking a gunman. i am not implying the contrary. i am however looking at the fact that we are talking about school children ages 6 to 17. Sandy hook killer shot and killed 6 year olds. there was not a chance in the world they could fight back. this is why i tried to point out that the video you posted (unless i am wrong) was of a college student who was 22 years of age. thats an adult in my book. totally different situation.

 

[hoshin1600]

But that fundamentally agrees it's a societal issue. That it's the root cause of the problem not being addressed.

To refuse to do anything about people who pose a real threat to others is to deny that it's a problem. It might be understood, but if that understanding isn't acted on what's the point?

ok from that perspective i can agree. i was making an assumption that your view was that American society was creating people who are more likely to be killers. that there is a problem with the US and we are causing people to be disgruntled mass murderers. at this point in time i cannot agree with this point of view. maybe some day we will discover that mcdonalds and microwave ovens have a detrimental impact on brain development and we are in fact creating serial killers but until then.......

 

[DaveB]

Start the kids meditating and practicing chi kung at age 4.

By age 6 roughly 1 per class should have ascended to the 4th Potential and be able to maintain Mushin and launch focussed chi attacks to disrupt the brain function of an assailant.

Obviously this will require teachers to learn the appropriate psychic defences and recovery pressure points in case the prodigy child has a Carrie moment.

 

[pdg]

ok from that perspective i can agree. i was making an assumption that your view was that American society was creating people who are more likely to be killers. that there is a problem with the US and we are causing people to be disgruntled mass murderers. at this point in time i cannot agree with this point of view. maybe some day we will discover that mcdonalds and microwave ovens have a detrimental impact on brain development and we are in fact creating serial killers but until then.......

No, if it came across as me saying it's an American society problem then I said it wrong.

I'm quite sure every country grows it's own killers...

The US population is much larger than say the UK, so obviously the straight number of murderers is going to be higher.

Does the same sort of thing happen in China, or Egypt, or Mongolia? Dunno, we don't get news from there... Maybe they have different processes in place that more effectively deal with these sort of issues at source.

There are things about American society I'm not a fan of, but I can say the same about British society, or French (I've lived there), and with some superficial research I could say the same about every country I'm sure - but those negatives are always massively outweighed by the fact that normal people are essentially the same, they want good things for them and those they care about.