A recent social media post by the smug hoplophobes at Michael Bloomberg’s Students Demand Action gun control group didn’t go the way they’d hoped. It went so badly, in fact, that they ended up closing comments to avoid the merciless heckling they were getting. The damaging and self-own, however, had already been done.
One the surface, it’s a typical anti-gun argument. The only thing that can save us from violence is more common-sense gun safety gun control laws. Doing anything else is dumb and even detrimental, especially for kids. Preparing for emergencies? We wouldn’t need to prepare for no stinkin’ emergencies if we could just transform the United States into Eurotopia with one simple trick…outlawing civilian firearm ownership.
There’s just one problem. The article they linked to doesn’t say that active shooter drills are bad. In fact most of it talks about best practices running the drills.
The only anti-drill argument presented in the article comes from — wait for it — Everytown for Gun Safety’s (SDA’s non-parenting parent group), while the other actual experts cited talk about how beneficial the drills can be when done right. In fact, by the end of the article, it’s made clear that a well-designed and thought-out drill isn’t only good for safety, but helps kids become responsible, situationally aware adults.
The article conveys a number of good suggestions for designing a good active shooter drill:
- Drills should be tailored to students’ developmental levels and physical abilities and consider their prior traumatic experiences, special needs and temperaments.
- All drills must ensure the physical and psychological safety of students, who also must understand the information provided and be proficient in following the steps of a drill.
- School-employed mental health professionals should be involved in every stage of preparation.
- Student participation should never be mandatory.
- Parental consent should always be obtained.
- Establish a long-term, follow-up plan to support sustainability that includes assessing ongoing or changing preparedness training needs.
“If we have to do it,” one researcher was quoted saying, “let’s make sure we’re doing it right. Because, at the end of the day, what drills are teaching people is situational awareness and decision-making in stressful situations, and that’s a life skill anybody can benefit from.”
I’d recommend reading the whole thing, but long story short, the article doesn’t support Students Demand Action’s assertion at all. It’s clear that active shooter drills are a proven way to reduce casualties and don’t harm children when they’re planned and conducted responsibly.
The Necessity Of Drills
Another important thing to keep in mind is that, no matter what gun control groups preach, mass shootings at schools are still extremely rare. Even if they’re more common here than in other countries, very few students will ever experience one and the chances of it happening to any particular student is still near zero.
At the same time, my education and training in emergency management and homeland security supports keeping them. Why? Because we’re dealing with a high risk, low frequency event with very little discretionary time for decision-making.
As risk management expert Gordon Graham points out in the video above, these are the worst situations anyone can face because the outcome matters and we’re the least mentally ready to get them right. But with intelligent training, we can put something in our “mental hard drive” in case a high risk, low frequency event comes up.
To drive the point home, I’ll share a quote from another well-respected expert, Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger. He’s known for saving hundreds and perhaps thousands of lives crash-landing a passenger jet in the Hudson River after a catastrophic bird strike event (here’s a fairly accurate depiction of what happened).
“One way of looking at this might be that for 42 years, I’ve been making small, regular deposits in this bank of experience: education and training. And on January 15, the balance was sufficient so that I could make a very large withdrawal.”
I don’t know about you, but if Sully says we need to train for near-impossible hazards, I’d make sure my kids’ schools are doing it.
Increasing anxiety and depression is the goal.
Broken and abused kids grow up into broken and abused adults a.k.a. Democrats.
Anxiety, indeed. From the article, wherein it shows the recommendations for a “good drill”:
“Student participation should never be mandatory.”
Uh-huh. It looks to me (if the photos are what we’re being shown as representative of the drills) that the students are being conditioned to briskly obey and and all orders given to them, including marching where commanded and placing hands on heads. I can understand LEOs wanting to know where everyone’s hands are for general safety’s sake (akin to a detainee not having his hands in pockets or otherwise hidden), but being forced to march with hands up on your head is very intimidating.
It’s all kabuki. Repeal the NFA. Repeal the GCA. Abolish the ATF. Abolish BGCs and the false security we’re told they guarantee. Allow every American citizen to carry without infringement, including school staff. Restore our society’s respect for life. The problem will sort itself out very quickly, and anyone who attempts to commit heinous crimes such as MSEs around children will be taken out vigorously and immediately by school staff with their own guns.
It’s not rocket surgery.
The school shooter drill frequently do NOT follow these recommendations and do in fact include moronic drill components that traumatize kids involved. Tabletop drills with the staff is a better option in lower elementary grades.
You raise a valid point.
IMHO, based on experience, I doubt that this is an issue of “the drill existing” but rather the way that it’s executed.
Clearly, you can design training to prioritize many things and in some cases even optimize for something.
It wouldn’t be terribly shocking if many of these drills are designed around an idea of basically reversing the psychology of a fire drill where the point is to actively try to keep people as calm as possible.
It also wouldn’t come as a surprise to me that such a thing is actively reinforced by activists (aka teachers) who go out of their way to twist the knife while adding a “We only have to [abuse you] do it this way because of gun nuts”.
The amount of subtle and semi-subtle “nudging” going on in K-12 these days surprises even me.
“The amount of subtle and semi-subtle “nudging” going on in K-12 these days surprises even me.”
Yeah, but it’s not working nearly as well as they hope it would, the kids can see it for what it really is, an act.
Even the trans-sexualization of the younger ones is now getting some serious push-back…
I’ll apologize in advance for the length of this because you touch on the point that I’ve kinda been driving at for a long, long time.
So, I’m kinda gonna go on a rant here.
===
Agreed.
The issue, as I point out all the time, is that this is a game of statistics. The question is: Can they reach a critical mass before pushback reverses their gains?
On the LGBTQ thing I suspect they jumped the shark too early. However, the history of the last 50 years where they’ve managed to capture nearly all the institutions (SCOTUS excepted, that was a “near-miss”) essentially proves that they’ve been extremely effective.
Effective enough? Still unknown.
But that observation leads to two conclusions.
1. If they are allowed to retain what they have taken they will eventually win via attrition. That is inevitable and actually will not take very long at this point. If they’re not at critical mass (they’re not, IMHO), they’re close and as I’ve pointed out before, they don’t need a majority, just the illusion of one. Just like the Bolshies.
2.The issue with most of what they do and the reason I’ve bothered to bang on about it so much is because their tactics require secrecy specifically because they are a small minority. In that regard, they’re like roaches, turn the light on and they scurry for cover.
They know they can do what they want with a vocal minority provided that the game doesn’t come to public scrutiny. But if what they’re doing does come to light then they will be revealed for the manipulative minority that they are and will be forced to retreat as the “silent majority” (not really a majority, statistically) realizes that they don’t actually have to take this shit.
===
Which kinda leaves us in a awkward position. OTOH, their ability to truly win is doubtful at best. However, they are in a good position in many regards and a lot of these people are spiteful nihilists who take an [intentional] misreading of Nietzsche* as some sort of gospel.
This strongly suggests that if they realize they are close to winning but can’t finish the job they very well may just “burn it all down”. Given what they fully control at this point in time, this is something they really can do and can do “but good”. Given their obvious predilections, philosophical background and emotional dysregulation, they almost certainly will try to burn it all down because they see everything a zero-sum. If they can’t have it they sure as shit won’t let you have it because you’ll use it against them. (Again, people tend to think that everyone sees the world the same way. If they think “I’d do X” they assume you would too. So, people who’d hurt you for fun or power can’t imagine that you won’t do the same in return to them and they assume that the only reason you don’t is because you lack the power to do it.)
Now, that burning down is something that can be prevented by the majority, provided that it is foreseen and headed off, which at this point it is not because most people seem to have exactly zero idea what we’re dealing with here.
Which is to say that we can’t just flip the light switch on and laugh at the roaches scurrying away. They’ll go under the fridge and burn the house down pretty fuckin’ quick. Steps must be taken to push them back but in a manner where they don’t turn the fridge’s coolant system into a firebomb. This can be done, but it requires knowing that they’ll do it and taking steps to prevent it.
Then we need to start putting out philosophic roach motels via the education system we just took back. This is true from K-12 through post grad in most disciplines.
The reason no one really seems to get this is because basically no one outside the academic Left understands the Left’s actual philosophical/psychological motivations or how they interface with reality because no one really reads these people’s literature other than academic Lefties who use manipulation and selective quotation to influence other people to undertake short-term actions that will result in unacceptably high long-term costs that are yet unknown to the actors doing the things in question. (Stated with brevity: “It’s a cult”.)
Further, nearly no one understands Entryism or Gatekeeping. No one really wants to study this stuff either. They don’t grasp that a lot of what goes on in institutions isn’t “because the institution” it’s because the people running it are activists first and [job title] second. That’s actually pretty easy to remedy once you realize the actual problem instead of inventing bullshit CYAs for how it’s not your fault that those people managed to capture the institution in the first place.
===
* To quote the man himself [Noting first that this comes from a book “The Will to Power” which is actually his set of notes to write a book by the same title, something he won’t do because he will become too ill and eventually die. As such, these are somewhat incomplete observations ON nihilism, not praise for it as many would have you believe. Nietzsche isn’t supportive of this, he’s merely cataloging his observations of it, which is obvious if you read it, which essentially no one does, though they’ll tell you that they did/do.]:
13 (Spring-Fall 1887)
“Nihilism represents a pathological transition stage (what is pathological is the tremendous generalization, the inference that there is no meaning at all): whether the productive forces are not yet strong enough, or whether decadence still hesitates and has not yet invented its remedies.
Presupposition of this hypothesis: that there is no truth, that there is no absolute nature of things nor a “thing-in-itself.”[1] This too, is merely nihilism — even the most extreme nihilism. It places the value of things precisely in the lack of any reality corresponding to these values and in their being merely a symptom of strength on the part of the value-positers, a simplification for the sake of life.
14 (Spring-Fall 1887)
Values and their changes are related to increases in the power of those positing the values. The measure of unbelief, of unpermitted “freedom of spirit” as an expression of an increase in power.
“Nihilism” an ideal of the highest degree of powerfulness of the spirit, the over-richest life — partly destructive, partly ironic.”
[1] He’s referencing Hegel’s ideas of deconstruction to find negatives which elucidate the “thing-in-itself”, which can’t be known unless all positives and negatives are discovered via the dialectic. Hegelian dialectic seeks to know the “whole thing” in this manner. Fredrick’s not a fan.
Does any of this sound like he supports Nihilism? Hard to read most of it in context and come to that conclusion, which is why his work is “well known” but not actually known.
===
If you actually read this guy you will understand a lot about how the Left operates and why they think that “There is no truth but power”. You will further understand that Nietzsche doesn’t support this (though he did as a young man before realizing how batshit crazy it was and becoming an apostate).
It is the fact that no one reads the guy’s work in full (or if they do they read dogshit translations that have a bias to make him say what the translator wants) that allows for this. Snippits out of context can make anyone say nearly anything.
In a nutshell:
He thinks that at the time he’s doing most of his writing (~1868-1888) that the history of philosophy, religion and social norms has lead to an impasse. Basically, if you take Christian thought (he’s a European, afterall) it works quite well until some mistakes are made in the Enlightenment. These mistakes happen to dovetail with other mistakes made during The Reformation to create a nearly perfect shitstorm.
The combination of these mistakes leads to a situation where Nihilism will rise because the mixture of mistakes sews the seeds for the destruction of Christian faith, effectively, by those professing it. This is due to widely held erroneous beliefs that could be, and are, construed as internal contradictions. This not only will bring down Christianity but will bring down anything else that we might see as an attempt to impose a similar moral system without the Christian basis, Kant’s philosophy for example.
Said another way, the fatal errors are not in the religion, they’re in a combination of mistakes made ~1517 and then more mistakes made in the 1600’s and 1700’s which alter the practice and interpretation of the religion in such a manner that produces the illusion of deep internal contradictions. (You can see these same things in the 2000’s with the New Atheist movement which uses those perceived contradictions as arguments.)
Fred reckoned that this would result in the removal of rules and social norms over time because they “don’t matter”. But since these restraints are the only thing holding society together, their simple removal without anything to replace them will lead to a horrorshow where people try to derive moral behavior from pure logic on a short temporal horizon, which is impossible. That’s just pure hedonism for the person doing it and it justifies anything you might want to do. Unrestrained will is not going to will good things into existence, it’s going to justify itself to the ends of the earth without realizing that the logic is circular.
Logically, this will result in abhorrent behavior. But worse than that, the religious impulse will still exist and without the actual religion you get a striving for “Heaven on Earth”, that is, Utopia. So, you end up with Rousseau on steroids but even worse. That is, justified atrocity on a scale never before seen.
This is particularly dangerous when combined with other philosophical inventions of the early 1800’s and late 1700’s, like Hegel’s dialectic which demands a focus on the negative.
The result is pure Will to Power entirely unconstrained by any form of morality because there is no truth, there is only power and “being right” means controlling truth via power. Ergo, mass murder on the basis of “logic” is sure to follow. (which it did in the 1900’s).
Ultimately his argument is this: Along the road we were on in his time (and still are on) Christianity will inevitably die. With it will be the moral constraints on society and government. Such things cannot be rebuilt once destroyed and someone like Kant can’t be substituted in because Kant’s morals are, at base, Christian too even if Kant didn’t realize this.
The result is that we’re faced with three choices. Embrace the demise of civilization, find a way to reconcile Christianity with itself by demonstrating that observation of internal contradictions is actually an error or, as he advocates, find an entirely new philosophy that gives us the same outcome as Christianity but is fundamentally different at base to the point that it can be slotted in as a replacement. “Beyond Good and Evil” as it were.
If you don’t get this, it’s hard to fight it unless you’re cool with exactly the same bloodletting that the Nihilists are because without an understanding of how and what they’re doing your only option is to mass on them the way they would on you.
Also introducing sexual materials at as young an age, as they can possibly get away with. This is how children are broken down by the state. And torn away from their parents.
The sexually liberated always want to introduce sex to children. And it’s the sexually liberated who have stopped shooting teams in schools. They have stopped 2A education in schools.
But they can’t wait to teach her children about sex.
I just remembered – again – part of the reason school shootings couldn’t have been very effective, back in the day. During warm months, we opened windows to allow the cool breezes to blow through the school. Yes, windows that opened. My high school was built before air conditioning happened, and only retrofitted to offices and teacher’s lounge later. In an emergency, classrooms could be evacuated, directly, without going into the hallways, or through the main entrances. Getting out of most classrooms was no challenge at all to a healthy, active boy. Second story classrooms posed a bit of a challenge. Third story was pretty much out of the question for most.
Today, one must smash a window to get out. Smaller children and the less active and able are imprisoned within, just where the shooter wants them.
Whoops, forgot the fire escapes on the third floor. Four of them, one in each corner of the building. Students would have to go out into the hallways, to access them, but there was no need to descend through the building, even for the less capable students.
For centuries Gun Control has catered to criminals, tyrants, etc. And as long as there are marching Gun Control History illiterate busy bodies who denigrate the Individual’s Right of Self Defense it will be business as usual. The evil inherent with Gun Control will continue to leave behind trails of bloody, deceased DEFENSELESS Victims. Abolish Gun Control Now. AGCN.
saw something about this on the news a few days ago–i don’t remember if was a drill or an incident, but the student was saying something about the school’s training, the three F’s—flee, fall, fight i think it was——how something sounds wrong——i can’t take credit for this, it was on a sign on the wall at the local range—–gun control is the ability to hit the target——maybe a better saying for the schools should be —- firearm, focus, and fire——
One “F” is all anyone needs: FIRE!!! (and no I don’t mean the kind that will fetch up the fire brigade to quench flames).
I have reviewed EVERY school, mall, other public gathering “mass shooting event” and I cannot recall ONE of them that had ANYONE armed and ready as the event opened and developed. NEVER happened.
On the other hand, I can recall quite a number of similar “eents” that never made the grade to qualify as a mass shooting… and could not because there WAS an armed Someone who took immediate and effective action with whatever weapon was ready to hand. action that ENDED the event decisively.
If anyone else can recall an event where an armed nobody went to work and the perp still managed to accumulate enough hits to put the event ito the “mass shooing” category, please inform me. I’d like to know the one exception.
I’ve participated in active shooter drills. At local, state, and federal facilities. Both as a shooter and as a victim. For the most part they are little more than performance plays where everyone knows their part. The one time I played outside the boundary’s of the script as the shooter. I shot 2 security personnel in a federal facility, before they knew what hit them. Because they followed the prescribed rules of engagement. Something shooters don’t have to do.
“The one time I played outside the boundary’s of the script as the shooter. I shot 2 security personnel in a federal facility, before they knew what hit them.”
Well aren’t you the life of the party! ; )
LOL LOL LOL!🤓I needed a laugh. Spent most of them day at my mechanic getting my my van fixed. They had “problems” but it got done.
Yeppers!!! And I’ll bet the other guys in that event are talking about it still……. serves ’em right.
Made my point that the whole operation was a joke. It certainly woke up the security chief. Now the entire process has been revamped. Too often these so called drills are nothing more than a dog and pony show. For the department heads and media. So they can pat each other on the back and tell the public what a great job they are doing.
Have to be able to “Check the box” to keep the funds flowing.
Kobayashi Maru…
The far left knows how to fear monger very well. These drills do draw attention to things but never really fix the problem. This is exactly like hiding under a desk in school for new-key-ler threats.
These kids are being put through hell in my opinion by the left.
ONCE MORE the BS about getting under desk drill. The idea was to prevent ceiling tiles/lights from falling directly on your pointed head. Was not to shield you from blast or gamma radiation.
lol
In such a situation, falling tiles are the least of the concerns. You make it sound like those tiles are 20lb steel plates.
It isn’t THAT the wind is blowing, it’s WHAT the wind is blowing. The only winning move is not to play.
This isn’t a soggy ceiling tile from a rain storm leak. This is a brick building being disintegrated. Something your not going to be able to outrun.
You’re about as sharp as a bowling ball, aren’t you boy? When SHTF, you seek cover and concealment. If all you have is hiding under a desk, you use that meager cover and concealment, and pray that it’s enough to survive the next few minutes. THEN you seek real shelter.
There’s more than just ceiling tiles over your head in any building, starting with plumbing and electrical and communications. You don’t want ANY of it falling on your head if there is to be a shockwave. The blast may not reach you at all, but the shockwave will knock stuff loose.
If you suspect a nuclear blast, all the best money says to get low, and get under something – the more substantial, the better – but a desk can save your life.
@Paul
I’m not suggesting there is nothing else there. I am suggesting that the single biggest thing this process teaches is fear. Most of the American population has been spoon fed fear with a shovel over the course of a lifetime that this really isn’t the land of the brave anymore. That is why nearly every person here were so quickly willing to submit to the insanity that was the reaction to Covid. It’s a philosophy that has been getting instilled in us for generations. Fear is to be conquered. What is being depicted in this articles picture is our youth being taught how to surrender.
Someone could characterize a mass-murder attack at a school as the infamous “black swan event”. The problem with black swan events is that they actually happen.
The average person may think of a violent home-invasion as a black swan event. Well, about seven years ago my neighbor four-doors to the north of me experienced an armed home invasion. It was psychologically devastating to the youngest daughter who fled her home at 6:15 a.m. and tried desperately to bust into multiple neighbor’s homes seeking safety. And then there was the violent home invasion four doors to the south of me just a few days ago complete with gunfire. (I have not been able to determine yet if the invader shot at the home owner or vice versa.)
Note that I live in a location that everyone would characterize as an extremely safe and nice semi-rural area about 12 minutes from a nice (and “safe” of course) city of about 50,000 people–and in a “shall-issue” state where firearm ownership is common.
Moral of the story: uncommon events happen and they could happen to you. Plan and train accordingly.
I’ve said it for years. There’s no such thing as a ‘safe’ area. Anybody who believes they live in a ‘safe’ area is a fool.
This may make some people uncomfortable to say, but it’s true. Back in the 1980s. When black kids were shooting each other at inner city schools. People just said “well that shows the black people, doing what black people do.”
And then in the 1990s. You had white rural kids, shooting each other in schools, in Arkansas, kentucky, and elsewhere.
A gun free zone is an invitation to a murderer. It starts in one area but eventually it spreads everywhere.
Volunteer teachers should be armed and trained. And 2A education and shooting teams need to be brought back into all schools. Because it teaches discipline and self control to children. Besides also teaching civic responsibility.
Sounds like you might be closing in on where I lived in Ohio.
The upshot, so far as there is one, is you get desensitized to it pretty quick and it happens to kids even faster.
strych9,
At this point I wish that I lived in Ohio: my state has gone full-on Blue politics. Historically my state has been purple–even leaning slightly red at times–in politics. Now my state went over the proverbial Blue cliff. (Minors in my state now have a constitutional RIGHT to sex-change operations and abortions without parental knowledge or consent.)
“Minors in my state…”
Issue 1 just brought this to Ohio, so it’s here too.
Clarification:
Constitutional right or statutory right?
==
Also, a note, turning parents against children and children against parents is what the Commies do. Since 1917, it’s one of their SOPs.
[Side note: At this point I don’t make much of a distinction between Commies and the Commie-adjacent. If goals are Commie, you’re dealing with a Commie. Further distinctions are academic and not something we any longer have the time for.]
Constitutional. Issue 2, regarding recreational marijuana, was a legislative initiative and can be modified by legislation. Issue 1, regarding reproductive freedom, was a constitutional amendment.
https://www.ohiosos.gov/globalassets/elections/2023/gen/issuesreport.pdf
Interesting way they phrased that Amendment, lol.
Also, I see that the arguments and explanation section has not improved since I left the state.
Hardly shocking I suppose since it took be the better part of a decade for me to succeed in getting them to stop sending me mail-in ballots half way across the country.
Common sense often is anything but.
Put up a ‘Gun Free Zone’ sign. Problem solved.
Seems like an active shooter drill is showing one or more potential active shooters a predictable response to which they could take advantage of.
Yahtzee…You win the interweb for the day.
The rational part of me finds “active shooter drills” to be a somewhat ridiculous but necessary evil given the general inability to do smarter things.
===
The lack of capacity to do smarter things causes the cynic in me to view such acts thusly:
Make sure you teach those kids good, gotta keep the hands on the head or in the air!
Otherwise some porker in a blue suit might take a moment away from ensuring he can never pass a basic PFT and one-up the actual shooter when he simultaneously drops a bag of Doritos, shits himself and zaps a bunch of kids with his .gov supplied M4.
[In the voice of Hillary Clinton: You know, the M4 he wouldn’t need if you rural-knuckle-dragging-bitter-clinger-Bible-humping-extremist-MAGAtard-deplorables would just give up your murder toys before we end up having to drone strike you and your kids to save the kids!]
At which point it will be sold as an step-up. “Look, the Uvlade PD took 82 minutes to allow 21 people to die. We’ve improved on that by actively shooting the children! We just went ahead and killed 26 in 31 minutes! We’re 335% more effective!”
Besides, if you don’t start young, by the time they get to high school the kids might not like TSA’s touchier-feelier “inspections”!
strych9,
“In the voice of Hillary Clinton: … you rural-knuckle-dragging-bitter-clinger-Bible-humping-extremist-MAGAtard-deplorables …”
And you get a 98% score for capturing just about ALL of the insults that Pr0gre$$ive Democrats love to hurl at “others”.
Yes, 2 points off because we THUMP our Bibles in this neck of the woods, pilgrim.👍
Hard Lefties refer to it as “Bible Humping” because the word sounds similar and they believe that it’s an extra little dig because, of course, all Christians are closeted LGBTQ or outright bigots. Maybe both. Dovetails with their two main trolls directed at the Right.
I further suspect this is what passes for a clever play on words in their world but I’ve not seen or heard any of them say that explicitly. Weird how a bunch of English majors actually suck at some aspects of language while being so good at using it manipulatively.
Ok, that’s a new one for me, and it fits the pattern. +2 bonus points for nuance.
From what I’ve read about these drills, they are about as useful as the life boat drill on the Titanic. Perhaps 1 student in 100 will retain the needed information and make the right choice in course of action.
These drills are about as effective as the duck and cover drills we got back in the day. What is effective is the shooter being stopped immediately by return fire. Or, the sure and clearly understood knowledge that such response will be applied. Even someone who is deranged will think twice if they understand they will be met with overwhelming force/violence should they choose to act.
There are cost effective retrofits most school buildings/districts could do to limit accessibility to a building. Allowing staff to carry if they choose and are willing to be trained and continue to train would also help. The panic porn and fear mongering done does nothing to stop the threat.
This a psy op. This is really intended to instill fear in the population starting at a very young age. And yes I believe the teachers “on the ground” are completely in on this plan.
It’s not every teacher. It’s most of them. And the ones that are not in on it, are just weak going along with it. And not standing up against it.
This is complete example of a moral panic going on in our classrooms.
It’s time to shift the Overton Window.
Every policy has unintended effects. Disarmament policies lead to massive death counts. AR15 ownership is a moral imperative, as I argue here: https://substack.com/@mikenowland/posts
My wife is a teacher and we talk about these drills. What weve come up with is that it is good for testing the time that you could get your class to move from point A to point B, and that every situation would be different and dependant on where the shooter was in the building. If he’s on the other side of the building and you can get em out, then get em out. if hes close, hunker down.
We both detest the fact that she wouldn’t be hunkering down without her pistol, but thats the rules right now. She was gonna carry anyway but they have 3 armed security guards now. (For what that’s worth…hopefully at least enough to have the shooter move on to the next school).
I just havde to know. When did a student become and expert on mass shootings?
I aqbsoluyely agree thatthe USA needs sensible gun contriol laws but that cn only be succeessfulf if the Gun owners of American FULLYENGAGE in that process in instead of opposing every single attempt at doing so .
One thing is for absolute sur though . No legislation can possibly haave any chance of working as losg as theere is UNCONTROLLED availabilitty ; You know and I know and the whole of mthe USA should bloody well know that6 with welll movwer HALF of all firearms in the USA being held illegally that anybody with mthe cash in hand can access their weapon of coice pretty much at will and at least withiin a week with no questions asked and there is absolutely NOTHING the Law can do about it.
No form of Policing can POSSIBLY work without the Co-operation and consent of those being Policed So until the American Gun owners voluntarily limit thy number of firearmsgand ammunition and have in plce more stri9gent requirements su8ch as MANDATORY and frequent UNANNOUNCED Official assessment as to SECURITY of HELD Firearms and Ammunition held there is nothing to be done A good start would to me be thAT IN A CASE OF firearms theft the loss of the riht btp possess [firearms] should be the starting point as should any lapse in msecurity,. Not unreasonable I’d say if the gun Owners of the USA really are serious.
By the way if the possession of firearms for SELF DEFENCE actually worked sure to goodness the tryly dreadful Gun Crime Figures for the USA should be going down and not increasing exponentially should they not ?? When will you all wake up to the fact thqat you gun owners are being subjectd to one of THE most successful marketting exercises inthe History of the World.
.
Prinxe Albert, the fake RAF wannabe, it seems your spelling is still in the illiterate side yet again?
First you are a BRIT which means you have no say in what goes on here in the US. If you want to be a Hoplophobe, that is your perogative (if you don’t know what that means, I suggest you get a dictionary).
The fact is that SELF DEFENSE certainly does work. There are thousands of incidents where Americans have used a firearm for self protection. Here is a link for your perusal:
https://www.thetrace.org/2022/06/defensive-gun-use-data-good-guys-with-guns/?gclid=CjwKCAiA1fqrBhA1EiwAMU5m_7CiBdessGeoZlqbFjcx93pmXUUyYptGsRcen_9rjvwYqmj6CTXDmBoCghMQAvD_BwE
“Student participation should never be mandatory.
Parental consent should always be obtained.”
When a school shooter strikes, student participation is not optional, and parents’ approval is never obtained.
@Strych9
Very nice, compact treatise; ‘preciate your effort.
“Ergo, mass murder on the basis of “logic” is sure to follow.”
That is recently being raised, with the proclamation that Earth can only sustain 500,000,000 humans, indefinitely. Such declaration comes from the climate change cabal, and gaining acceptance.
“Student participation should never be mandatory.
Parental consent should always be obtained.”
Yeah, I’m sure all the schools follow those guidelines! /sarc
I’d like to see what happens to any kid who says, “I refuse to participate in the school shooting drill,” especially when the cops are running the drill.
I’d also like to see what happens to the kid and the parents if the parents refuse to allow their kid to participate in school shooting drills. They’d be summoned to the principal’s office to explain themselves.
School shooting drills accomplish only three things, which all work towrds the goals of gun-control extermists:
1) The drills traumatize kids, causing anxiety and depression.
2) The drills brainwash kids into thinking “all guns are evil and should be banned.” That’s the main purpose of school shooting drills, and MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
3) The drills train kids to become more effective and deadlier school shooters, how to rack up the maximum death toll. School shooting drills teach future school shooters how to kill the most number of people, because they teach future school shooters exactly what countermeasures their school uses (or doesn’t use), exactly where kids will be hiding (e.g. huddled in the corner with the lights off), and how to use that knowledge to maximize the death count. By training kids to be effective school shooters, this serves the purpose of the gun-control groups, who celebrate every school shooting as an opportunity to pass more gun control laws disarming law-abiding citizens.
Comments are closed.