View Full Version : Kids Fighting back against gunmen in school
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,464848,00.html
I'm all for people not sitting around waiting to die, regardless of their age.
Of course, many school officals are against the plan, hence this gem of a line:
"We had immediate discomfort with all of this because it’s not the way we’ve thought about it in the past, and also, we worry a little bit more about the liability of all of this,"
I'm glad to see they are more worried about being sued that kids getting shot. My 8 year old told me how they "think about it" now - and his instructions from the school is to hide in a cubbard. Forget about going out the window (it's single story) - let stay in the room and hide in the cubbarb so the gunman doesn't find you. We're sure he'll never look there!
So many great lines in that article, it's hard to choose just one! But this was my favorite:
"A lot of kids come from unsafe places at home, and school is their only haven, you know, and for them to come into school and have to think about that stuff I think can be scary," parent Hope Carter told MyFOXBoston.com.
So ... the kids are in unsafe neighborhoods, but we don't want them to learn how to protect themselves.
Instead, we want them to believe that school is a haven and keep them from anything that might seem scary.
My God, we're raising a generation that could be invaded by the French!
My God, we're raising a generation that could be invaded by the French!
LMAO!
My God, we're raising a generation that could be invaded by the French!
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:Dman thats some funny shit right there ,Thanks I needed a good laugh today
So, we won't allow teachers to carry guns in schools to prevent this kind of thing, and even if we did how many actually would? Instead, we have to teach the kids to fight the bad guys.
How about having parent volunteers? I'd adjust my schedule at work to stand around the school with an AR, a MICH and level IV armor. I'd even compromise and carry a concealed pistol instead. Imagine how Columbine would have been different if halfway through their first mag those two losers got plugged in the back by an angry mom.
Holy shit.
Let me get this straight. Some idiot in a school said we need to train 5th graders to defend themselves in the event of attack in their elementary school, and everyone here is for it? What a fu*ked-up era we undoubtedly live in.
Adults run the school, adults are responsible for the children, adults and only adults should be trained to handle a threat. Police, guards, teachers, who the frig ever. If any aspect of my 10 year old child's school day needs to be spent in combat training, I pull him the fu*k out immediately.
What are we, a third world country for Christ's sake? This the best we can do? Even a hint of acceptance regarding this moronic plan is as frightening as it is nauseating.
SingleStacker45
12-10-08, 19:05
Holy shit.
Let me get this straight. Some idiot in a school said we need to train 5th graders to defend themselves in the event of attack in their elementary school, and everyone here is for it? What a fu*ked-up era we undoubtedly live in.
Adults run the school, adults are responsible for the children, adults and only adults should be trained to handle a threat. Police, guards, teachers, who the frig ever. If any aspect of my 10 year old child's school day needs to be spent in combat training, I pull him the fu*k out immediately.
What are we, a third world country for Christ's sake? This the best we can do? Even a hint of acceptance regarding this moronic plan is as frightening as it is nauseating.
That's just the tip of the iceberg in the U.S. Consider the fact that Two of the most important jobs in our society are the lowest paying; Teachers and Police. It's disgusting how we squander trillions of dollars on nothing and we can't even protect our kids in school. Post a damn policeman or two or three at every school. Find the money for something good for a change.
Mule
Holy shit.
Let me get this straight. Some idiot in a school said we need to train 5th graders to defend themselves in the event of attack in their elementary school, and everyone here is for it? What a fu*ked-up era we undoubtedly live in.
Adults run the school, adults are responsible for the children, adults and only adults should be trained to handle a threat. Police, guards, teachers, who the frig ever. If any aspect of my 10 year old child's school day needs to be spent in combat training, I pull him the fu*k out immediately.
What are we, a third world country for Christ's sake? This the best we can do? Even a hint of acceptance regarding this moronic plan is as frightening as it is nauseating.
Well, the adults WON'T do it. I believe that no one is ever really safe anywhere. If we knew when we were safe, we'd always avoid "unsafe" areas. I don't think we're really talking "combat" training here - but something other than "stand there and be shot."
In my kid's school, his instructions are to hide in the school supplies cubbard. WTF good is that? I was just thrilled to see SOMEONE step forward and say "Maybe standing there to die is not the best option."
That's just the tip of the iceberg in the U.S. Consider the fact that Two of the most important jobs in our society are the lowest paying; Teachers and Police. It's disgusting how we squander trillions of dollars on nothing and we can't even protect our kids in school. Post a damn policeman or two or three at every school. Find the money for something good for a change.
Mule
I don't disagree that we can do better to secure our schools. Regardless, I don't see how any self-defense minded individuals can advoate a "do nothing the police will protect you" attitude. No one said the kids need to rush the guy and try and take him down - just that the school's policy shouldn't be "stand there and take a few rounds." That's exactly what my kid's school policy is.
They even said in the article:
Georgetown Police Chief James E. Mulligan told FOXNews.com the proposed technique was intended to be a "last ditch" thing to be used in cases where a gunman has been able to thwart police and get inside a classroom alone with students.
and ...
Do we want the kids to sit there and literally have the gunman be able to shoot them one at a time? Or do we want to allow instincts to kick in and basically allow them to protect themselves against the threat?
Let's put cops in the schools. Volunteers. I'll sign up right now. But that STILL doesn't make you or anyone else safe, and people STILL need to be able to do SOMETHING other than stand there and die.
Instead, we want them to believe that school is a haven and keep them from anything that might seem scary.
Well, it IS a "gun free zone" so maybe that's not too far fetched. ;)
Holy shit.
Let me get this straight. Some idiot in a school said we need to train 5th graders to defend themselves in the event of attack in their elementary school, and everyone here is for it? What a fu*ked-up era we undoubtedly live in.
Adults run the school, adults are responsible for the children, adults and only adults should be trained to handle a threat. Police, guards, teachers, who the frig ever. If any aspect of my 10 year old child's school day needs to be spent in combat training, I pull him the fu*k out immediately.
What are we, a third world country for Christ's sake? This the best we can do? Even a hint of acceptance regarding this moronic plan is as frightening as it is nauseating.
I'm with you. The general cowardice of our school system is appalling. Our teachers, administrators, and school boards are so incapable of providing a basic level of safety that we have to teach children to fight? It's pathetic. How can a anyone expect a 10 year old kid to fight when their teacher is unwilling to do so?
The fact is that even psychotics are not dumb when it comes to choosing soft targets that will garner the most publicity for their ****ed-up agendas. The "gun-free" policies adopted by these schools and colleges should be renamed "free-fire" policies. Perhaps some liberal can tell me why it's fine to have an armed guard at the Smithsonian, but we leave our kids unprotected 8 hours a day.
Perhaps some liberal can tell me why it's fine to have an armed guard at the Smithsonian, but we leave our kids unprotected 8 hours a day.
That a pretty damn good question.
Yep combat training is a bad idea, but hey we teach them stranger danger at school also, and BO stated sex ed is good for five year kids, and the list goes on,
All the mandated items a school must address to adhere to laws and what must be taught in schools there is no time left to teach them to read. Trust me my kids struggle at times, also as a former school employee we spent so much time in assemblies and meetings to adhere to state ad federal regulations that the teachers don't have time to teach if they want to besides worrying about which parent is going to be mad at them next.
CarlosDJackal
12-10-08, 20:53
Thanks for the new sig line, Todd!! :D
Well, the adults WON'T do it.
The adults won't do what? Protect children?
Yet they can train them to fight back? With what?
Insanity.
Gutshot John
12-10-08, 21:40
I don't think anyone is talking about having a Kindergarten HRT. The first lesson needs to be escape and survival, but with kids being victimized daily anyway, I see no harm in giving them a "fighting" chance when they have no other choice. If nothing else it helps breed a mindset necessary in this day and age.
Sad but necessary, parents should already be doing this.
If NOTHING else, we should be having this discussion without a blanket endorsement or rejection.
There you go no good answer either way. Dealing with insane crazy deranged individuals, is there really a sane answer, you are dealing with something we can't comprehend.
The adults won't do what? Protect children?
Yet they can train them to fight back? With what?
Insanity.
Again, no one necessarily said the kids to "fight" per se ... just that policies that force kids to stand there and do nothing are not in their best interests. The school adminstrator said it - they are concerned with the liability.
No one is advocating a group of 10 year olds breaking glass bottles and attacking the gunmen - just that when you get to the end of the line a "do nothing hide in the closet" policy serves no one - certainly not the kids being attacked.
Yes, the adults won't protect the children. Our children are largely unprotected in government mandated "free fire" zones. Want armed guards patrolling the hallways on a regular basis? People would be pissed off about that, too. Want armed teachers? People are ALREADY pissed off about that. Want armed college students? You guessed it - people are pissed off. So yes, I maintain that the adults are NOT getting it done.
My hat's off to at least one police chief to suggest that when the SHTF at school, lets at least try and give the kids some sort of a chance. I told my kid that if he hears shots, go out the window. It's a one story building, and hiding in the damn arts and crafts cubbard is STUPID.
Trump said it makes more sense to train school staff to deal with a gunman.
No kidding ... but we're not doing that, either.
The first lesson needs to be escape and survival, but with kids being victimized daily anyway, I see no harm in giving them a "fighting" chance when they have no other choice. If nothing else it helps breed a mindset necessary in this day and age.
I agree 100%.
shadowalker
12-10-08, 22:26
Parents should already be teaching their kids how to do this. As a parent of two I know I am with our 14 year old and will be with my 1 year old.
Kids are taught to behave in a VERY predictable way and go to predictable locations when incidents happen, active shooters and bad guys are going to count on this. We need to teach our children to think outside the box and good judgment.
The bottom line is Beslan was not intended to be an isolated incident and we should very much expect something similar except on a larger scale to happen in the US.
Even without terrorists active shooters are a big problem. Even though they want to, Law enforcement can not protect our kids just like they can not protect us.
It is NOT PC but it is about time a school started thinking about teaching kids how to at least have a chance to survive.
No one is advocating a group of 10 year olds breaking glass bottles and attacking the gunmen - just that when you get to the end of the line a "do nothing hide in the closet" policy serves no one - certainly not the kids being attacked.
Understood, but teaching 5th graders how to go on the offensive against an armed adult attacker in any form is so f*cking ridiculous I just can't believe it.
I really try to refrain from semi-cursing in my posts, but this is too much.
sixboysdad
12-10-08, 23:20
No one is advocating a group of 10 year olds breaking glass bottles and attacking the gunmen
I realize this is a serious discussion, and I appreciate that. But did anyone else get the picture in their head of Stewie Griffin doing this and saying, "I'm gonna cut you, bitch!" when they read this?
OTOH, I agree that this should not be taught in schools. That's why I do it at home. At least I can teach them the mindset that they don't have to hide in a cupboard--they can run, or they can fight if they are cornered, but don't go down without that fight.
Carlos -- My pleasure, dude.
I don't have kids (as evidenced by the fact that I haven't committed suicide), so I'm surprised by the number of folks who have objected to the idea of kids learning to protect themselves. Not a criticism, I'm genuinely interested in hearing your thoughts.
Ideally, teachers and police will come to the kids' rescue. Just like, ideally, police will come to my rescue if someone breaks into my home late at night. But just as I wouldn't give up my right to defend myself simply because the police may show up in time, why should kids be taught to sit tight and pray for the cavalry?
If fifth grade too young for a kid to start adopting a warrior mindset? Many of you have stated that you teach your kids these things at home, anyway. If you can teach your kid avoidance and evasion and resistance, what is the specific objection to schools doing the same?
Again, I'm not asking these questions as challenges, they're sincere.
If fifth grade too young for a kid to start adopting a warrior mindset? Many of you have stated that you teach your kids these things at home, anyway. If you can teach your kid avoidance and evasion and resistance, what is the specific objection to schools doing the same?
Teaching kids at home to defend themselves at 10 is one thing. Teaching that same 10 year old to go on the offensive against an armed adult, in a school that is full of adults directly responsible for that child until they get off the bus, is quite another. Sure, let's just assume that most likey the adults will be inept and ineffective, therefore prepare the 70 pound children for battle with a man wielding a gun who is shooting people. :rolleyes:
If the threat is substantial enough for them to consider that extreme, then it is substantial enough for the school to have armed personnel in the building. End of story.
By the way, exactly what might you envision a 10, or even 11 or 12 year old doing to an armed gunman to stop him? Maybe something out of the movie "Home Alone" like marbles on the floor then a blow with a ruler?
Please.
Safetyhit --
I don't envisage a 10yo beating up an armed adult. But thirty 10yo's would make it a lot harder for him to be effective ... certainly compared to having thirty helpless sheep for the slaughter. Will it save every child? No. I think the point of the program is to make the best of a horrible situation.
When a gunman walks into a classroom, there is likely going to be one adult present, not a school full of them. I think it's pretty clear based on historical data that the teacher is one of, if not the, first person to get shot. I doubt you're advocating an armed guard or two in every classroom, are you?
I guess what it comes down to is this: could a classroom full of 5th graders do anything to increase their odds of survival while waiting for adults to arrive and respond to an active shooter?
It's also worth noting that in most of the school shootings I can think of, the shooter has been a peer, not an adult off the street. So could a group of 5th graders do something effective against one 5th grader with a gun?
If someone says, "Hey, from a developmental standpoint, 10yo's just aren't capable of this," you'd get no argument from me. I know zippy about child development. But barring that, I'm trying to figure out what they lose by learning to fight back rather than cower in fear.
Safetyhit --
I don't envisage a 10yo beating up an armed adult. But thirty 10yo's would make it a lot harder for him to be effective ... certainly compared to having thirty helpless sheep for the slaughter. Will it save every child? No. I think the point of the program is to make the best of a horrible situation.
I personally believe the idea is good in principle if the actions taught are defensive, not offensive. However, the defensive actions should be limited to getting away from the gunman or, yes, finding a place to hide. Training little kids to attack when cornered is still training little kids to attack. And really, with what and how?
Look at it this way. Anyone see the dozens of stories of high schoolers hiding under desks and such while others were shot around them? How many would be alive today if they stood up and rushed the gunman? Good question. If it were a few teenage boys that attacked while he reloaded or was distracted, great. I am all for it.
But what about if a few girls gave it a try, think they would have the resilience and aggressiveness to succeed? Wonder if any might get shot just for trying? They may be better served under the desk or running out the door if the bad guy is distracted.
Now, replace the high school teenagers with 10 and 11 year olds. What are they supposed to do? What weapons do they utilize in an environment where certain scissors are deemed too dangerous to be in the building?
Todd, as someone without children I can semi-understand your perspective. But, again I ask, what has a 10 year old's school day become if part of it incorporates them thinking "I could be attacked and killed today, so I better be ready" and learning to physically fight a much older, likely adrenaline pumped, much larger, ARMED man?
And, what if the person just wants, let's say, his ex-wife the teacher dead and wants to make a spectacle of the event by doing it in the school. A bunch of attacking kids (again, with what weapons?) may only fuel his rage and cause him to retaliate.
If the threat is substantial enough for them to consider that extreme, then it is substantial enough for the school to have armed personnel in the building. End of story.
That right there is the crux of it. If the school does not have an armed school safety officer, and they haven't trained the teachers to take down a gunman, they've got no business teaching my kid to do their jobs. Having a child step up to the responsibility of a cowardly adult pacifist is disgusting.
A 10yo with a ballpoint pen and a mean disposition could certainly hurt someone. :cool:
Like I said, I've got no kids and no horse in this race. To me, the idea of teaching a kid to defend himself at an early age makes sense. Whether it comes into play during a active shooting, an attempted abduction, or a playground bully incident it's still better than hiding under a desk and Hoping for Change.
A 10yo with a ballpoint pen and a mean disposition could certainly hurt someone. :cool:
Like I said, I've got no kids and no horse in this race. To me, the idea of teaching a kid to defend himself at an early age makes sense. Whether it comes into play during a active shooting, an attempted abduction, or a playground bully incident it's still better than hiding under a desk and Hoping for Change.
I agree with the self-defense principle. I have no problem teaching a child to defend themselves.
My issue with the story behind this thread is that there are people out there advocating teaching the kids to fight an armed assailant in the school. While I don't disagree with this principle either, I think it's rediculous to teach the kids to fight when the teachers and principal's are not equally trained.
If my daughter's kindergarten teacher is required to take 40 hours of instruction in Krav Maga every year and has established a coordinated plan with other teachers to confront and kill an armed assailant in the school, and THEN they want to teach my kid how to do a leg tackle so Miss Teacher can deliver a proper curb stomp, then I've got no problem. But if the teachers and principals are saying "We don't take the threat to these kids seriously enough to arm ourselves or hire armed security officers, so let's just train the kids instead." That is a NO-GO in my book.
CarlosDJackal
12-11-08, 15:09
I personally don't have an issue teachings kids how to survive. As long as the Instructors puts the use of force in the right perspective and parents reinforce the ethics involved with learning how to use force.
I'm wondering why there hasn't been an incident (that I've heard of) of an "Active Killer" doing his or her dirty deed at a Boys Military Academy (we have quite a few of those in Central VA). Or how come there aren't very many in Parochial or Private Schools?
IMHO, they should bring back some sort of self-defense course in schools (all schools) and make it mandatory for kids to take some Combatives as part of their Phys Ed. But this is never going to happen when we can't even have Dodge Ball in some so-called educational systems as it is.
IMHO, they should bring back some sort of self-defense course in schools (all schools) and make it mandatory for kids to take some Combatives as part of their Phys Ed.
How about make the "Combatives" course a requirement for adults who have the strength and knowledge to handle an armed adult threat much better than their ten year old students if we are so worried about it? Any logic there?
Anyone of the die-hard Joe's here want to tell me what a 10 year old child who plays with action figures at home is going to do against an enraged, armed adult attacker? Seriously, someone tell me.
Besides the brilliant ballpoint pen idea. ;)
Hmm... my kids' school is pretty much gunman proof. The reinforced doors are all kept locked, visitors are fully screened, the staff is armed and trains regularily, there's a small secure armory on site full of guns and ammo, the children are all given some degree of defensive (and offensive) tactics training according to their ages, and there's a police station less than one block away if all else fails (absolute last resort only).
Want to know where my kids go to school? My house.
Personally, I don't think the schools are that bad, as far as physical safety. 300,000,000 people in this country, and every once n a while a psycho gets into a school and shoots the place up. your kids are more likely to suffocate in an abandoned refridgerator than get shot by a psycho school shooter. My problem with public schools is ethically based. I think the public school system is a moral ****ing cesspool.
However, if somebody's gonna learn gunman defensive tactics, it needs to be the staff. I can picture some pansy ass faggot lib teacher cowering in the corner while his/her 5th grade students charge a gunman with textbooks...
I think the public school system is a moral ****ing cesspool.
I agree with this one hundred percent plus, our schools are so passive and sensitivity trained that everything is GREY anymore.
Scott
QuickStrike
12-11-08, 18:35
A 10yo with a ballpoint pen and a mean disposition could certainly hurt someone. :cool:
Would probably be bad to give some kids these ideas...
Kids are kids, they are more likely to apply this the wrong way vs. say.... one of us(gun-nuts).
John_Wayne777
12-11-08, 20:55
There are two effective responses to an AS event:
1. Shoot him
2. Flee
Given that we are not going to have 5th graders packing firearms, the best alternative is to teach them to get the hell out of the school ASAP and to get as far away from it as they can as quickly as they can.
The "lockdown" response to an active shooter event is the problem. Keeping all the kids nicely contained where a shooter can get to them at his leisure isn't an effective strategy for those 4-10 minutes it can take for the cops to show up and take out the shooter.
Fighting would be a last resort.
...and frankly, I don't see the schools teaching it. What if they teach a kid how to use a pen as an improvised weapon and then the kid uses that technique on a classmate? Lawsuit. What if the kid actually does it in a bad situation and ends up dead? Lawsuit. Add to that the fact that the people running schools are 99.999% guaranteed to be absolute sheep and ANY talk of offensive measures is going to go over like a lead balloon. Hell, half the people in the room may start CRYING on you when you suggest it.
When it comes to decision making in public institutions these days think about the big L: Liability.
We already teach kids to evacuate the building in case of fire. We make a standard practice of getting everyone out if there's a bomb threat....but for an AS suddenly the SOP turns into a lockdown.
Duh.
Just making that change in SOP would be helpful.
Blinking Dog
12-11-08, 21:11
I've got kids, young ones at that, so this kind of hits me in the gut.
While this may not be a great idea (ok, far from it), I prefer this direction to where we've gotten to in most schools...that is, a kid in 1st grade draws a picture of a gun or talks about a gun and they get expelled. Or a kid gets into a fight and they're branded a felon. Come on, who didn't get into a fight in school? Schools have gone so completely to the left it's like they're teaching our kids to be sheeple. So do I want them to teach my kids to attack a gunman, not really. But do I like the mind-set of self defense rather than cowering in the corner and getting popped...yes.
So in my humble opinion, it is a step in the right direction...but perhaps a little mis-guided.
I'd prefer school districts allow teachers with concealed carry licenses to carry in school. All a school would need would be one or two of them I'd think.
My $0.02 FWIW
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.