A take on school shootings

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Wasn't sure if this was a Romper room or Mindset. Seems more mindset to me.

http://www.theatlantic.com/education...otings/385642/

It's an analysis of active shooting training and the consequences of such. While the piece does not promote armed fac/staff, it does discuss the problems with the passive hide world view. While I applaud the fight meme - I've argued elsewhere that such might work in smaller settings to dog pile someone but a carefully chosen attack on various room configurations would easily negate the charge of the number #2 pencils.

Another interesting aspect is the discussion of preparing for a low probability event - now, does this seem a like a gun forum topic? Touch of a smile here.

[NETim]

I thought this was settled science? Just toss canned food at the killers.

[GardoneVT]

"Yet a growing number of parents and psychologists argue that this immersive approach in the country’s schools isn’t justified by worthy statistics. After all, the chance of any student dying in a school-related shooting is one in 2.5 million."

This stat is why discussion here isn't productive .

The people with the authority to make the decisions intended to protect students and faculty are ordinary humans interested primarily in their survival.That's just a statement of reality, not a moral judgment.

As such,whenever we consider actions to train students /faculty the admin faces two basic choices; they can either allocate scare funds on expensive training resources and risk adverse liability when a student legally armed with University sanction or a resource officer NDs their pistol to protect against a statistically rare event.

Or option B, pretend it'll never happen to them and carry on. This plan means no one gets fired pre incident,and in the unlikely the student body gets shot up the campus admin won't face lawsuits , budgets won't get altered and ideological feathers don't get ruffled.

No matter what the facts end up being, Option B is what colleges will default to outside of some massive public pressure or legislation. Its too much like a domestic violence relationship where the victim would rather get assaulted and do nothing then face the music of their dilemma and take long and painful steps to actually fix it.

[Lomshek]

No matter what the facts end up being, Option B is what colleges will default to outside of some massive public pressure or legislation. Its too much like a domestic violence relationship where the victim would rather get assaulted and do nothing then face the music of their dilemma and take long and painful steps to actually fix it.

Unfortunately you're right. The decision makers live outside of reality and aren't interested in the best decisions.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Having read the lit and gone to some conferences on such:

1. Some campus cops train realistically. Some don't.

2. Administrations have as a focus the total liability of the institution in mind. Their analysis is that they have less liability from the actions of a shooter as compared to the actions of defender gone awry.

Only legislative action that overrides administrations would also things like campus carry. Even first aid training is seen by some administrative risk managers as to high a liability to organize such hands on training. Videos are available.

[Shellback]

...risk adverse liability when a student legally armed with University sanction or a resource officer NDs their pistol to protect against a statistically rare event...

Has that ever happened? The student, not the campus cop. Quite a few college campuses allow students to carry and I don't remember reading of any in recent history.

[GardoneVT]

Has that ever happened? The student, not the campus cop.

I hate to quote myself, but you just cited a fact.....and :

"No matter what the facts end up being, Option B is what colleges will default to outside of some massive public pressure or legislation. "

[TAZ]

Has that ever happened? The student, not the campus cop. Quite a few college campuses allow students to carry and I don't remember reading of any in recent history.

Don't remember reading news flashes about the rash of student ND's, but that is all irrelevant, don't you see. Trying to use logic when dealing with these types of debates often results in a severe headache.

1. School shootings are rare and we shouldn't devote a lot of time, money and better spent resources on dealing with them.
2. School shootings happen every day and we should ban guns and limit magazine caps and destroy those EVIL racist black guns.

Head hurting yet??

3. Funds are scarce for training of staff and what not.
4. We have funds to study the effects of bat guano on the sex drive of overweight lesbians.

How about now? Head starting to hurt?

Forget logic and stop thinking about anything other than the welfare of the organization in question. Universities care about one thing and one thing only. The welfare of the university. Not the welfare of the students, staff or other entities. They only care of the university. Aside from the standard welfare BS they don't care if their cheerleaders are raped every night so long as admissions are good and the university is making $$. Once the bottom line gets impacted they will find the $$ to do what is needed to get those checks coming in once more.

[RoyGBiv]

Not my idea, but I've tried to advocate for tying school funding to pro-2A school policies.
It's clear that administrators will routinely choose "ban" if left to make the choice on their own.

Given that even many private schools take public funds in some form, passing a law that says "no public funds can go to any public or private institution that prohibits 2A" (or something properly considered) will force a fix very quickly. I believe this will be an easier path legislatively as it gives truly private institutions a choice and takes the decision making out of the hands of public school administrators. I'm hoping we'll see this strategy used in TX this session.... Not holding my breath.

[Shellback]

More flame on the fire... The data is the most current I could find. Sorry for the prep outline format... Working on this for a speech I'm giving in the near future.

a. A 2011 study looked at leading causes of deaths of college students. The study included 157 four-year institutions, over 1,300,000 students, and ranked mortality rates per 100,000 students. (Crime Prevention Research Center, 2014)
i. Suicide (6.17 per 100,000 students); Non-alcohol related injury (3.51); alcohol-related vehicle injury (3.37); unknown cause (3.0)
ii. Non-alcohol related non-traffic injury (2.39); cancer (1.94); alcohol related non-traffic injury (1.49); homicide (.53)

b. For every 200,000 college students:
i. Approximately one dies per year due to homicide.
ii. Approximately twelve die from suicide and seven die from drunk driving.

III. During the 2013-14 school year, there were a total of three non-gang, non-suicide killings at universities, and three more at K-12 schools according to the Crime Prevention Research Center.
a. Included in those numbers are attacks off of school property that were not related to the school, suicides well after school hours by adults, a justifiable defensive use of a gun and gang fights outside of school hours.
i. National School Safety Center reported school years from 1992 to 1997, there were 26 gun murders per year on K-12 and university school property.
ii. During the last five school years, 2009 to 2014, the average was 12, resulting in a 55 percent drop.

b. 77 million Americans between the ages of 5 and 22, indicating a school murder rate of 0.008 per 100,000 people in the 2013-14 school year, well less than 1 percent of the overall murder rate.