school shooting

[apl68]

There's certainly no question that in the U.S. today there is a pervasive fear of sudden, unpredictable violence against random people by mentally unstable individuals.  We had a minor scare along those lines only this morning at our library.  The circulation desk received an anonymous phone call describing a certain vehicle in our parking lot.  The caller said that the driver was undergoing a psychotic episode, was doing drugs, and hadn't slept in days, and was a threat to those around him.

Well, you can't be a supervisor at a public place and not have to address a report like that, not in today's climate of fear.  First I walked along the road past the corner of the parking lot where the vehicle sat, to determine whether there was anybody in it.  I couldn't see through the tinted windows from a few yards away, but did hear loud music playing within.  I called the police and let them know about the situation, and asked if they could check it out.  Shortly afterward a staff member observed an officer pulling up, speaking with the occupant or occupants of the vehicle, and then driving away.  Then the vehicle drove away.  End of story, as far as we can tell.

I have no idea what the driver was doing, sitting there in the parking lot just playing music.  Maybe he was downloading it with our wi-fi?  I'm glad for the sake of the staff's peace of mind that he chose to leave, but it's pretty obvious that the officer saw no signs for serious concern.  Either the caller's concerns were way overblown, or the whole thing was a rather unfunny prank.

[Ruralguy]

Nobody uses the term "psychotic episode" in a prank phone call. They may have not accurately assessed the situation, though it was likely an honest guess, or it was accurate, but the police decided that they couldn't do much other than to ask the person to no loiter and cause a disturbance.

[smallcleanrat]

Nobody uses the term "psychotic episode" in a prank phone call. They may have not accurately assessed the situation, though it was likely an honest guess, or it was accurate, but the police decided that they couldn't do much other than to ask the person to no loiter and cause a disturbance.

???

[jimbogumbo]

This blogger is a firearms expert and gun owner. He is fed up (on the blog you'll find a 14(!) part series on the crazy US gun culture. The linked piece describes his anger without needing to read the previous 14, and about half way down he has a proposal to address the wack jobs described by marshwiggle.

https://www.stonekettle.com/2015/06/bang-bang-sanity.html

[dismalist]

School shootings actually contribute very little to US firearms deaths, most of which are suicides, though not overwhelmingly so.

Firearms deaths in the US are at a rate near the bottom of the rate of Third World countries. I've always thought that we are the world's most advanced Third World country.

My take on the 2nd Amendment has always been that a gun in 1789 is not the same thing as a gun in 2021. It's  a whole world's difference in firepower. [Those muskets didn't aim well, were a pain to reload, and didn't work when it rained! Scalia should have picked this up with his 18^th century dictionary.]

There is nothing in 2nd amendment jurisprudence that forbids safety rules for weapons. Scalia explicitly said that in Heller.

It's like with cars -- one drives cars, but they can kill. One hunts game with a rifle, but the rifle bullet can kill a person.

Handle guns the same way: Force liability insurance by law! And lot's of it depending on firepower.  I don't like high capacity magazines on semi auto weapons, but of course the insurance premium on this stuff would be much higher than for the type of rifle a hunter, could use, or a self defender with a low capacity handgun. Gun ownership would decline.

In addition to having pre-purchase background checks, one could then have post-purchase insurance checks, just as with cars.

This would also solve the problem of having a large stock of weapons in our hands but only controlling the new flow of weapons.

I am publishing this phenomenally efficient solution here because it will be ignored wherever I published it. :-( No smiley on account too many deaths from this source.

[mahagonny]

Jesse Jackson gets into the act. A lot about racism, and a lot of stated concern for the victims in Oxford Michigan, but not a word about about the flagrantly racist slaughter in Waukesha, killing fifty per cent more than the Oxford murders, and injuring dozens, some seriously. I like the way he slips in some bits about Kyle Rittenhouse, inviting you to be outraged at the verdict without stating it directly.
True to form.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/12/7/22822270/parents-responsible-for-their-childrens-gun-violence-jesse-jackson-column

[ciao_yall]

I'm surprised that the rest of you are surprised- we are usually the LAST place to get any sort of safety training. But we are also in Florida, and Parkland really rattled many of our U-PD, based on the talk they give us before the drill occurs.

In our online training video, our chief security officer says that given our size and situation, it's not a matter of if we will have an active shooter, but when.  Chilling.

A number of years ago, there was a shooting in a classroom at the school where I was teaching. The shooter was a student I had taught the previous semester.

I still think this kind of statement isn't helpful and we need to be careful to keep the actual risk in perspective. I can't really assess the veracity of the statement because the term active shooter is is pretty vague. However, the actual risk of someone with a gun coming into my classroom is very, very low and it is important that I not start acting like its higher than it is. I can't teach effectively if I overestimate the risks and spend lots of time worrying about how to protect myself from a remote personal threat.

I agree that the risk is low, certainly lower than the risks involved in my daily commute.  In our security officer's defense, he meant our university would have an active shooter, not a given classroom. Given the size of our place, the odds are quite small that an active shooter would show up in my classroom.  I still find it chilling that a campus that has always seemed a safe haven could have an active shooter shatter that illusion and kill and maim here, and that the experts predict it will happen.  I don't carry that thought into the classroom with me on a daily basis, but I am glad that someone is thinking about the probability of such an event and has made plans to address it when it arises.

We also have fire drills, earthquake drills and similar emergency preparation activities. We hope they aren't necessary but are glad when there is an emergency we know what to do.

The other day I was in a shopping center when an emergency alarm went off. Everyone was quickly and calmly walking towards the exit. It was clear that all the shoppers were used to this sort of thing even if we had never been in an emergency in this particular shopping center.

I was at work the day a major earthquake hit, and had the presence of mind to stand in a doorway, then duck under a desk.

Soon after this earthquake I was at a company dinner with bunch of out-of-town executives. The room started shaking and we locals all jumped under the tables. The waiters tried to explain to us it was the dishwasher in the basement that had thrown a wrench or something... but dinner was over. We were all ready to go home after that scare. I suspect the visitors are still scratching their heads wondering why we were so skittish about a noisy dishwasher.

[secundem_artem]

Like most of you, I've had the "run, hide, fight" training.  And if I ever come to need it and run my fat arse out of a classroom leaving 3 dozen kids to their own fates, the morning news will be "Cowardly overpaid professor leaves students to die". 

[Caracal]

I'm surprised that the rest of you are surprised- we are usually the LAST place to get any sort of safety training. But we are also in Florida, and Parkland really rattled many of our U-PD, based on the talk they give us before the drill occurs.

In our online training video, our chief security officer says that given our size and situation, it's not a matter of if we will have an active shooter, but when.  Chilling.

A number of years ago, there was a shooting in a classroom at the school where I was teaching. The shooter was a student I had taught the previous semester.

I still think this kind of statement isn't helpful and we need to be careful to keep the actual risk in perspective. I can't really assess the veracity of the statement because the term active shooter is is pretty vague. However, the actual risk of someone with a gun coming into my classroom is very, very low and it is important that I not start acting like its higher than it is. I can't teach effectively if I overestimate the risks and spend lots of time worrying about how to protect myself from a remote personal threat.

I agree that the risk is low, certainly lower than the risks involved in my daily commute.  In our security officer's defense, he meant our university would have an active shooter, not a given classroom. Given the size of our place, the odds are quite small that an active shooter would show up in my classroom.  I still find it chilling that a campus that has always seemed a safe haven could have an active shooter shatter that illusion and kill and maim here, and that the experts predict it will happen.  I don't carry that thought into the classroom with me on a daily basis, but I am glad that someone is thinking about the probability of such an event and has made plans to address it when it arises.

We also have fire drills, earthquake drills and similar emergency preparation activities. We hope they aren't necessary but are glad when there is an emergency we know what to do.

I wonder how effective any of those drills are. I would suspect it depends on the place and the situation. I don't think I've ever participated in a fire drill where I personally felt better prepared to deal with a real fire afterwards. In most buildings, there isn't really much mystery about how to get out quickly. Is a drill really more effective than just giving people the information in those cases? Of course, fire drills are presumably also about testing the systems and there are buildings that are more complicated.

Obviously, the people in charge of campus safety should be thinking about active shooting scenarios and have plans in place. That's their job, but that doesn't mean I should be involved. Is a drill really going to help anyone know what to do? I'm not completely convinced there's anything particularly helpful about the "run, hide, flight" advice, but even if its useful, it isn't really stuff you can simulate with drills. There is training that can help people evaluate the circumstances, make good choices and act decisively, but that's tactical training. It isn't appropriate for students and teachers.

[ciao_yall]

I'm surprised that the rest of you are surprised- we are usually the LAST place to get any sort of safety training. But we are also in Florida, and Parkland really rattled many of our U-PD, based on the talk they give us before the drill occurs.

In our online training video, our chief security officer says that given our size and situation, it's not a matter of if we will have an active shooter, but when.  Chilling.

A number of years ago, there was a shooting in a classroom at the school where I was teaching. The shooter was a student I had taught the previous semester.

I still think this kind of statement isn't helpful and we need to be careful to keep the actual risk in perspective. I can't really assess the veracity of the statement because the term active shooter is is pretty vague. However, the actual risk of someone with a gun coming into my classroom is very, very low and it is important that I not start acting like its higher than it is. I can't teach effectively if I overestimate the risks and spend lots of time worrying about how to protect myself from a remote personal threat.

I agree that the risk is low, certainly lower than the risks involved in my daily commute.  In our security officer's defense, he meant our university would have an active shooter, not a given classroom. Given the size of our place, the odds are quite small that an active shooter would show up in my classroom.  I still find it chilling that a campus that has always seemed a safe haven could have an active shooter shatter that illusion and kill and maim here, and that the experts predict it will happen.  I don't carry that thought into the classroom with me on a daily basis, but I am glad that someone is thinking about the probability of such an event and has made plans to address it when it arises.

We also have fire drills, earthquake drills and similar emergency preparation activities. We hope they aren't necessary but are glad when there is an emergency we know what to do.

I wonder how effective any of those drills are. I would suspect it depends on the place and the situation. I don't think I've ever participated in a fire drill where I personally felt better prepared to deal with a real fire afterwards. In most buildings, there isn't really much mystery about how to get out quickly. Is a drill really more effective than just giving people the information in those cases? Of course, fire drills are presumably also about testing the systems and there are buildings that are more complicated.

Obviously, the people in charge of campus safety should be thinking about active shooting scenarios and have plans in place. That's their job, but that doesn't mean I should be involved. Is a drill really going to help anyone know what to do? I'm not completely convinced there's anything particularly helpful about the "run, hide, flight" advice, but even if its useful, it isn't really stuff you can simulate with drills. There is training that can help people evaluate the circumstances, make good choices and act decisively, but that's tactical training. It isn't appropriate for students and teachers.

These drills are effective because people immediately know what to do - quickly and calmly walk to the nearest exit. They have done it enough times with the sound of the alarm going off that they can remain calm and do their thing. It might even keep them calmer knowing "it's probably just a drill, but may as well be on the safe side."

[Puget]

I'm surprised that the rest of you are surprised- we are usually the LAST place to get any sort of safety training. But we are also in Florida, and Parkland really rattled many of our U-PD, based on the talk they give us before the drill occurs.

In our online training video, our chief security officer says that given our size and situation, it's not a matter of if we will have an active shooter, but when.  Chilling.

A number of years ago, there was a shooting in a classroom at the school where I was teaching. The shooter was a student I had taught the previous semester.

I still think this kind of statement isn't helpful and we need to be careful to keep the actual risk in perspective. I can't really assess the veracity of the statement because the term active shooter is is pretty vague. However, the actual risk of someone with a gun coming into my classroom is very, very low and it is important that I not start acting like its higher than it is. I can't teach effectively if I overestimate the risks and spend lots of time worrying about how to protect myself from a remote personal threat.

I agree that the risk is low, certainly lower than the risks involved in my daily commute.  In our security officer's defense, he meant our university would have an active shooter, not a given classroom. Given the size of our place, the odds are quite small that an active shooter would show up in my classroom.  I still find it chilling that a campus that has always seemed a safe haven could have an active shooter shatter that illusion and kill and maim here, and that the experts predict it will happen.  I don't carry that thought into the classroom with me on a daily basis, but I am glad that someone is thinking about the probability of such an event and has made plans to address it when it arises.

We also have fire drills, earthquake drills and similar emergency preparation activities. We hope they aren't necessary but are glad when there is an emergency we know what to do.

I wonder how effective any of those drills are. I would suspect it depends on the place and the situation. I don't think I've ever participated in a fire drill where I personally felt better prepared to deal with a real fire afterwards. In most buildings, there isn't really much mystery about how to get out quickly. Is a drill really more effective than just giving people the information in those cases? Of course, fire drills are presumably also about testing the systems and there are buildings that are more complicated.

Obviously, the people in charge of campus safety should be thinking about active shooting scenarios and have plans in place. That's their job, but that doesn't mean I should be involved. Is a drill really going to help anyone know what to do? I'm not completely convinced there's anything particularly helpful about the "run, hide, flight" advice, but even if its useful, it isn't really stuff you can simulate with drills. There is training that can help people evaluate the circumstances, make good choices and act decisively, but that's tactical training. It isn't appropriate for students and teachers.

1. It is important to teach people to take fire alarms seriously and evacuate calmly and quickly. My mother, as a young woman, was tutoring a student after school when the fire alarm went off. They didn't take it seriously, just started packing up their things while talking. Then someone came running down the hall yelling to get out-- the fire was very real and the school burned to the ground before it could be put out. Luckily everyone got out in time, but the ceiling was coming down as they did.  So yes, you want the habit of immediately leaving to be be just that-- a practiced habit.

2. The "run, hide, fight" training is there for a reason-- because it is not what most untrained people do in these situations. The first impulse is to hide, and that used to be the advice as well. But analysis of these situations revealed that the first choice should be to run-- get as far away from the situation as quickly as possible. Only when that is impossible (e.g., you can see the shooter nearby) should you hide, and before hiding you should grab anything nearby that can be used as a weapon (e.g., fire extinguisher, other heavy objects) and take it with you.

People don't think clearly in crisis situations--it may feel like you would know what to do without drills and training, but that goes out the window when there is immediate danger. You want the appropriate behaviors to be as automatic as possible.

[Caracal]

There's certainly no question that in the U.S. today there is a pervasive fear of sudden, unpredictable violence against random people by mentally unstable individuals.  We had a minor scare along those lines only this morning at our library.  The circulation desk received an anonymous phone call describing a certain vehicle in our parking lot.  The caller said that the driver was undergoing a psychotic episode, was doing drugs, and hadn't slept in days, and was a threat to those around him.

Well, you can't be a supervisor at a public place and not have to address a report like that, not in today's climate of fear.  First I walked along the road past the corner of the parking lot where the vehicle sat, to determine whether there was anybody in it.  I couldn't see through the tinted windows from a few yards away, but did hear loud music playing within.  I called the police and let them know about the situation, and asked if they could check it out.  Shortly afterward a staff member observed an officer pulling up, speaking with the occupant or occupants of the vehicle, and then driving away.  Then the vehicle drove away.  End of story, as far as we can tell.

I have no idea what the driver was doing, sitting there in the parking lot just playing music.  Maybe he was downloading it with our wi-fi?  I'm glad for the sake of the staff's peace of mind that he chose to leave, but it's pretty obvious that the officer saw no signs for serious concern.  Either the caller's concerns were way overblown, or the whole thing was a rather unfunny prank.

Probably not worth speculating, but after I finish I'll have to go back to grading so...

1. It could be someone just walked by a couple times and thought there was something strange and called. The drugs and psychotic episode stuff could just have been speculation on their part.

2. The person who called knows the guy and has some issue with him. Maybe they live or work near there and don't want him hanging around. The other stuff could be true or not in that scenario.

3. Its sort of a low key swatting type situation and someone is trying to get this guy in trouble.

Sometimes when somebody is doing work in our house or cleaning it, I take the dog. Often I just go park my car over where I can get onto the college wifi and try to get some grading done. If you walked by me as I was grading some particularly terrible student paper or reading a maddening email, you might wander if I was okay...

[Stockmann]

In addition to what others note about drills, they also help detect bottlenecks and other logistical issues - that emergency exit whose alarm didn't go off when it was opened, or that office where it took ages to evacuate because of its layout. But yes, most importantly, people often can't think straight in an actual emergency, so having a well-rehearsed response is helpful. I say this as someone who has had to flee a building under threat of imminent collapse - I've lived through multiple earthquakes.
In the case of earthquakes, you must figure out if you're close enough to the exit to make it out on time, know the nearest open space to head to, and if you're not close enough to evacuate then you must know where to take shelter quickly. You don't want to have to figure this out in the middle of an actual earthquake.
I've never had drills or any kind of active-shooter training, but I did look guidance up myself because it seems a far more realistic threat than a fire in a concrete building.

[apl68]

There's certainly no question that in the U.S. today there is a pervasive fear of sudden, unpredictable violence against random people by mentally unstable individuals.  We had a minor scare along those lines only this morning at our library.  The circulation desk received an anonymous phone call describing a certain vehicle in our parking lot.  The caller said that the driver was undergoing a psychotic episode, was doing drugs, and hadn't slept in days, and was a threat to those around him.

Well, you can't be a supervisor at a public place and not have to address a report like that, not in today's climate of fear.  First I walked along the road past the corner of the parking lot where the vehicle sat, to determine whether there was anybody in it.  I couldn't see through the tinted windows from a few yards away, but did hear loud music playing within.  I called the police and let them know about the situation, and asked if they could check it out.  Shortly afterward a staff member observed an officer pulling up, speaking with the occupant or occupants of the vehicle, and then driving away.  Then the vehicle drove away.  End of story, as far as we can tell.

I have no idea what the driver was doing, sitting there in the parking lot just playing music.  Maybe he was downloading it with our wi-fi?  I'm glad for the sake of the staff's peace of mind that he chose to leave, but it's pretty obvious that the officer saw no signs for serious concern.  Either the caller's concerns were way overblown, or the whole thing was a rather unfunny prank.

Probably not worth speculating, but after I finish I'll have to go back to grading so...

1. It could be someone just walked by a couple times and thought there was something strange and called. The drugs and psychotic episode stuff could just have been speculation on their part.

2. The person who called knows the guy and has some issue with him. Maybe they live or work near there and don't want him hanging around. The other stuff could be true or not in that scenario.

3. Its sort of a low key swatting type situation and someone is trying to get this guy in trouble.

I'm most inclined to suspect 2 or 3 in this case.

[apl68]

I've never had drills or any kind of active-shooter training, but I did look guidance up myself because it seems a far more realistic threat than a fire in a concrete building.

You're still probably statistically more at risk from fire in ANY kind of building--even supposedly "fireproof" modern construction--than from an active shooter.  Not that you might not find it worth your while to have guidance on the active shooter threat anyway.