The American Spectator

Stuart Koehl| 4.7.09 @ 6:41AM

Interceptor outer tactical vest--$1200
ESAPI front and back plates--$800
Kevlar helmet--$200
AR-15 rifle--1000
Kevlar shield--800
Total--$4000

Close enough, I suppose. You can get volume discounts. And where did all those homeland security grants go?

diane| 4.7.09 @ 7:00AM

My school system's schools, including every elementary school, practices two lock downs a year. One is announced. The police come to observe and offer constructive comments about what we've done. One is unannounced and serves as a practice run for us and for the responding police officers. We get a report afterward. We've been doing this particular type of drill for two years now. The police officer who speaks to our staff meeting before any of the drills explains to us that the officers coming in are going to mean business and will be moving fast. I'm too busy practicing hunkering down silently in the dark with my students to know.

Rocco| 4.7.09 @ 7:36AM

And the answer is more gun control??? By that line of reasoning, we should ban spoons because they make you obese, ban cars because of the death toll on our highways, so on and so forth... I recall that a student with concealed carry nipped a campus shooting in the bud a few years back in Virginia. What ever happened to individual responsibility for one's actions?

Raymond| 4.7.09 @ 9:10AM

As a former Police Officer, Weapons Trainer, and SWAT member, I can say the average Officer has no training or for the most part skill to do a Banzai charge into an incident nor should they. Running headlong into an incident is "Tombstone Courage" and will result in another usable firearm available to the bad guys. There never are perfect solutions to complex problems.

Crusader| 4.7.09 @ 9:58AM

Stuart, you should have finished:

Interceptor outer tactical vest--$1200
ESAPI front and back plates--$800
Kevlar helmet--$200
AR-15 rifle--1000
Kevlar shield--800
Total--$4000
Standing around in your cool military regalia while innocent kids get killed--priceless.

Could be a new Visa commercial I guess.

Maybe when the local Dunkin' Donuts is getting shot up will we see cops run headlong in to kill an active shooter. Until then, man the speed traps.

Crusader| 4.7.09 @ 10:05AM

Diane, no offense to you as I know you are just doing what you're told to do like a good little sheeple, but let's be honest. Don't call them "lockdowns." Call them "sitting duck downs" or "fish in a barrel downs." Either of these would be more appropriate.

Don't want your schools shot up? Don't want innocent kids murdered? How about this?

For approximately $700 you could arm one teacher with a Springfield XD45, all the accesories (holster, extra mags), and 100 rounds of hollowpoints. Problem solved.

Don't trust a teacher to do it (don't blame you, I wouldn't either). Hire a parent. God knows I would guard my kids' school in a heartbeat if asked. Would even use my own gun and ammo.

But these solutions are "radical." A much better one is to just make schools "no weapon zones." Criminals always respect those.

ncatty| 4.7.09 @ 10:27AM

All of the details are not yet out but a single small-town policeman responded to a shooting at a retirement home in NC recently. He was on the scene within four minutes, passed wounded and killed (12) in the halls, found the killer, exchanged fire and disabled the killer. The officer was struck in the legs by a shotgun blast. He shot the killer once in the chest with his handgun. Where do these heroes come from?

RT| 4.7.09 @ 10:28AM

"Time, talk, and tactics?” That sounds like the typical type of psycho babble born of the 1970’s. See the article linked below for an example of people with a more appropriate attitude of how to respond towards the threat of violence upon the innocent. God bless the fabulous Baker brothers.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_163_27/ai_99130342/

Appleby| 4.7.09 @ 11:06AM

But don't you have to find out if the shooters are members of a Protected Class of Victims of Exclusion before you can even talk to them?

And don't they (and their parents) have to sign release forms absolving you of all responsibility before you shoot them?

And don't you have to make sure that there isn't a "disproportionate" amount of firepower on one side or the other, and that the race and gender of the attacking force matches the general makeup of the community?

And what about that Environmental Impact Report, and making sure everything used is "Green"?

Geez, guys, you don't seem to know anything about how 21st century America operates!

Lee Schafer| 4.7.09 @ 12:14PM

Appleby has it right. Police can't just go around protecting innocent people by shooting the aggressors. They have to determine: 1) Are the victims truly innocent, no rich white person is ever innocent you know. 2) Is the aggressor's beef with society legitimate? Anyone other than a white person has a legitimate right to take action on their own if they feel they have been wronged by the white man. 3) Is the aggressor taking this action in response to some policy from the Bush administration? If so, they the aggressor's action is legitimate and is to be admired by the main stream media. 4) And of course the aggressor was made to do such a heinous act because of right wing radio.

Dave Hanson| 4.7.09 @ 12:25PM

At a moment of supreme danger, "The police are just minutes away!" What time have you got? Maybe ten seconds to save yourself, your loved ones, or the 'neighbors' you don't even know. Fight, or flight? The 'politically correct' response is 'flight, or just cower and die rather than fight.'

Feh. Instantaneous reaction is the *right* answer. But forget the 'trained SWAT' guys.
Crusader has the right idea: Arm and train volunteer members of the general population, men and women willing to "love their neighbors" to the point of physically defending their lives.
The same Lord Jesus Who said "Greater love hath no man than this: that a man lay down his life for his friends" also commanded His disciples: "Let him who has no sword sell his garment and buy one!" Government Model 1911 .45 ACP 'sword' fits my hand nicely...
Appleby notes that 'politically correct' response to mortal threat demands that we employ "green" self-defense resources. I concur! And so do Remington/Peters ammunition makers--they anticipated you by sixty years or so! ;-) "Go with the Green!"

Alan Brooks| 4.7.09 @ 3:13PM

lots of wildmen in CO.

Like, um, Ward Churchill...

Eddie B.| 4.7.09 @ 4:05PM

.38, 5 shot revolver in front trouser pocket at all times. Extra ammo in other front pocket. On special occasions, .45 M1911A1 holstered in small of back with 4 extra magazines in leg holster.

Bram| 4.7.09 @ 4:44PM

Raymond - I'm a former Marine and soldier. We trained to clear buildings of hostiles - not wait around for SEALs or Force Delta to show up. My National Guard unit used to cross-train with a SWAT Team.

Shouldn't the averge cop have a few day's worth of training for the same? It's not rocket science - get stacked, get through the door fast, clear your sectors, move to the next room. I think every officer should be able to do this.

As for weapons, a carbine in the cruiser trunk should suffice. Speed and accuracy win these fights - not robo-cop armor that won't stop a high-powered round anyhow.

Thom| 4.7.09 @ 5:30PM

I watched the local LE at Virginia Tech waddle across the grounds with their new AR-15s and pressed uniforms…. I saw when the SWAT showed up…. You can always tell as it has nothing to do with how it is portrayed on TV and the movies…. I have several Cops friends, former Special Forces, etc. We all get a good laugh out of all these theories about what will make LE more effective with Active Shooters…. Virginia Tech’s Security force was “top rated” by fellow LE before 31 innocents died waiting for LE to get situation awareness and assemble a force…. They are still top rated after one student cut off the head of another in a public area….

Who are we kidding here? The bodies are long dead and growing cold before the best trained LE can even get on site 99% of the time. The only possible response has to come from within the situation and in a relatively short period of time. I’m tired of LE people with an agenda not dealing with the truth of this. Your role in these situations are typically one of crowd control, setting up a protective perimeter and helping clean up the mess when it is over. I know first hand what it feels like to do “dynamic entry” into an unknown situation where deadly force will be employed either by you or at you in the blink of an eye. Law Enforcement with endless budgets, training and all the goodies can not win the race against time these situations present. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not creditable and ignoring a very large body of evidence on this. The only people that can meet the demands of time and distance are already on site and as a matter of public policy unable to defend themselves. Only Hollywood Cops movies feature the good guys getting there in time to save masses of people with just a handgun and great moves and shooting ability. This kind of crap will stop when it becomes dangerous to get your 15 minutes of fame at other people’s expense.

RT| 4.7.09 @ 6:14PM

Thom, yeah, an armed citizen on the scene can take care of the situation…if he’s allowed to. As John Lott demonstrated, more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens leads to less crime.

Chemman| 4.7.09 @ 7:05PM

Thom says "The only people that can meet the demands of time and distance are already on site and as a matter of public policy unable to defend themselves. " Therein is the crux of the matter. I hold a CCW that actually allows me to carry on a school ground but State Law forbids me to use this weapon to protect my students. Response time by the local sheriff's office in this very rural county is not in the minutes but hours. By the time "help" comes the damage is done. I know what my decision will be in a real crisis. I'll have to let the courts settle the question afterwords.

Thom| 4.7.09 @ 7:32PM

The bulk of these kinds of mass murders are done by what we group under the term “nut case”. By what ever name we lump them they are almost always “losers” and “cowards”. The last thing they want to run into is someone that means business, hence they don’t attack Police Stations or Donut shops for obvious reasons. Some want to commit suicide by Cop and that is generally a Cop’s worst nightmare when that happens. My biggest problem with LE is not the relatively rare “nut cases” although they seem to come out of the woodwork when Democrats are in power. Semi-pros could make these “nut case” scenarios look like amateur night by comparison. It would be difficult for an ordinary citizen with just the typical type of handgun carried to overcome such a force but it would upset the timetable and that alone can be critical to the extent of damage these people can do. My biggest problem with LE is this notion that they alone are the guardians of our society and the rest of us are just “pest” or potential bad guys and a threat to them. The way local and State LE handled themselves in New Orleans is disgraceful (confiscating weapons) and the way they close ranks when they get criticism about their performance when such events happens is a bit of a coward’s way out too. They become defensive when blamed for something they really can’t prevent in the first place. They (their leadership) won’t speak truth to the American people because it diminishes their importance and role in the scheme of things. The myth lives on and the cemeteries are filling up with people that believe this nonsense and trust what these people promise but can’t deliver on. LE is just another unionized bureaucracy these days. Their primary goal is to serve and protect themselves today for the most part. That’s not completely their doing however. Society in general has some responsibility in that situation. Never the less, the solution to this madness rest with the would be victims taking the responsibility to defend themselves at the very least. Who stands in the way of this most prominently? LE Leadership and the political leaders they give campaign contributions to. Follow the money.....

Thom| 4.7.09 @ 7:45PM

Bram, I tend to agree with the thrust of your statements but Class IV will stop non AP rifle rounds. The problem I’m having with the whole concept that more LE trained to respond to these kinds of situations is that this isn’t going to produce positive results because they are over before any force can get there the bulk of the times. The forces that do this full time pick the place and time of the breach most of the time. Just pushing the “stack” through the door when the shooter(s) is waiting doesn’t work out in practice real well most of the time if they are truly armed well. Time is critical and overwhelming force is critical also. It takes multiple teams to overwhelm armed defenders in these kinds of situations. Such a force is going to have to come from the community at large and on real short notice. Time works against this almost every time in an open society like ours. The Hero only overcomes such situations in Hollywood movies....

Anonymous| 4.7.09 @ 9:03PM

Whether "time, talk & tactics" or IARD-but-not-until-we're-fully-funded, it's not wanting to take action unless they feel like it. As a soldier, I go whether I want-to and/or am fully equipped for it or not. Sucks, I know, but people you're defending from getting killed by some bad guy come before your own life, limb and feeling like it... that's the responsibility, accept it or quit.

Crusader| 4.8.09 @ 10:11AM

Anon, I think one of the issues here is that modern-day cops want to dress like Army men but their responsibility, as outlined by the courts, is to society in general and not to individuals. That's why they will get all dressed up like GI Joe and stand around listening to bad guys shoot kids in a school. When the shots stop, they go in and outline the bodies in chalk.

I don't know about you but I am tired of seeing cops who look like third world militia members. What the heck happened to "Officer Friendly" in his black slacks with blue piping, blue shirt with actual badge on it and tie? That's a policeman. Now they want to dress in fatigues and have M16s but God forbid they actually use them. Too many of them have an "us against them" attitude about the general public, when 99.9% of us are law-abiding citizens who would be on their side if they didn't act like JBTs (see Robert Powell in Dallas as an example).

John Byrnes| 4.14.09 @ 8:34PM

Research has determined that from the Moment of Commitment (the point when a student pulls their weapon) to the Moment of Completion (when the last round is fired) is only 5 seconds. If it is the intent of a school district to react to this violence, they will do so over the wounded and/or slain bodies of students, teachers and administrators.

Educational institutions clearly want safe and secure schools. Administrators are perennially queried by parents about the safety of their schools. The commonplace answers, intended to reassure anxious parents, focus on the school resource officers and emergency procedures. While useful, these less than adequate efforts do not begin to provide a definitive answer to preventing school violence, nor do they make a school safe and secure.

Traditionally school districts have relied upon the mental health community or local police to keep schools safe, yet one of the key shortcomings has been the lack of a system that involves teachers, administrators, parents and students in the identification and communication process. Recently, colleges, universities and community colleges are forming Behavioral Intervention Teams with representatives from all these constituencies. Higher Education has changed their safety/security policies, procedures, or surveillance systems, yet K-12 have yet to incorporate Behavioral Intervention Teams. K-12 schools continue spending excessive amounts of money to put in place many of the physical security options. Sadly, they are reactionary only and do little to prevent aggression because they are designed exclusively to react to existing conflict, threat and violence. These schools reflect a national blindspot, which prefers hardening targets through enhanced security versus preventing violence with efforts directed at aggressors. Security gets all the focus and money, but this only makes us feel safe, rather than to actually make us safer.

Some law enforcement agencies use profiling as a means to identify an aggressor. According to the U.S. Secret Service and the U.S. Department of Education’s report on Targeted Violence in Schools, there is a significant difference between “profiling” and identifying and measuring emerging aggression; “The use of profiles is not effective either for identifying students who may pose a risk for targeted violence at school or – once a student has been identified – for assessing the risk that a particular student may pose for school-based targeted violence.” It continues; “An inquiry should focus instead on a student’s behaviors and communications to determine if the student appears to be planning or preparing for an attack.” We can and must assess objective, culturally neutral, identifiable criteria of emerging aggression.

For a comprehensive look at the problem and its solution, http://www.aggressionmanagement.com/White_Paper_K-12/

Ben Leichtling| 4.18.09 @ 4:51PM

In the space of five days, we honor Jackie Robinson’s finally breaking into the major leagues and we also memorialize Eric Harris and Dylan Klebolt’s massacre at Columbine High School ten years ago. They each faced a failed system – but in opposite directions – and they illustrate character and courage – but at opposite ends of the spectrum.

The stories about what was done and said to Jackie Robinson fill volumes. I was born in Brooklyn and was old enough to go to Ebbets Field to see Robinson play in his second year. The insults, curses and threats from the players and fans were still going on then.

The rotten system that kept Robinson out of baseball and harassed him for years was full of anger, hatred and the very real possibility of killing him and his family.

Eric Harris and Dylan Klebolt faced a rotten system on the other extreme. They were allowed to be violent, destructive and threaten classmates, but instead of being removed from contact with other students who were their victims, the two were coddled.

A generation in charge of the school and the police falsely believed that if you kept extremely troubled kids in contact with the rest of us and gave them lots of counseling, the troubled kids would stop being crazy bullies. Harris and Klebolt showed a generation what the price was for living that false educational philosophy; each one of those psychopaths could kill about ten innocent people.

We still haven’t righted the system. Thousands of innocent kids are bullied and harassed at school each day while society, the legal system and school principals don’t stop the bullying juvenile delinquents, psychopaths and psychotics.

Jackie Robinson had the character and courage to endure and surmount far worse than the bullying that is claimed to have pushed Harris and Klebolt over the edge. Robinson didn’t give up or explode.

Neither Harris nor Klebolt had character or courage. Bullying didn’t push them over the edge. They ran willingly and repeatedly right to the edge and then jumped off. None of the adults stopped them or removed them.

When will we start protecting the rest of us from the bullies and crazies?

Disclosure: In addition to having six children, growing up in Brooklyn and living in Denver, I’m a practical, pragmatic coach and consultant. I’ve written books of case studies, “Parenting Bully-Proof Kids” and “How to Stop Bullies in their Tracks.” Check out my website and blog at BulliesBeGone (http://BulliesBeGone.com).

Richard Baker| 5.2.09 @ 10:02AM

Have thought for years that the whole SWAT concept is ridiculous. Police are NOT Rangers, SEALS, or any other species of Special Forces. The entire concept drains Police forces of resources that would be better spent on training the average Officer and preparing him for quick reaction instead of cordoning off an area into a target rich environment for the killers and waiting for SWAT to arrive. Remember Patton's idea, paraphrased, that a good plan executed violently today is better than a perfect plan later (or tomorrow). Further, the Infantry look is not what Police should emulate.

Don Nash| 5.7.09 @ 10:07PM

I'm not an expert on law enforcement. But you don't have to be to see that the safety of innocent people is a priority with them. If I remember correctly, the first major massacre at a post office about 15 or 20 years ago resulted in many dead while the police did the same thing they did at Columbine.....nothing. IT WAS WHEN THE SHOOTING STOPPED THAT THEY GOT CONCERNED AND WENT INSIDE. Many were already dead and the shooter had shot himself. As mentioned, I am no expert....but there is another thing I do know. I am 58 y/o and grew up in a rural Texas County. When I was a kid the County Sheriff was legendary for his courage. He could have - and would have without hesitation - handled those two at Columbine...or anywhere else. I kid you not.

Don Nash| 5.7.09 @ 10:09PM

Correction:
"But you don't have to be to see that the safety of innocent people is a priority with them."
Should read "....is NOT a priority with them."