|
Post by Chris Clement on Feb 26, 2018 21:21:05 GMT -6
Imma throw this one out there - nobody has a window in their classroom?
|
|
|
Post by somecoach on Feb 26, 2018 21:53:47 GMT -6
Fortunately we have always had multiple retired NYPD on staff... they don't even go to Shoprite without packing Also the local Archdiocese has put together a fund to hire a private security company to every Catholic school in the city... the same rule applies to them (even though they are paid as "unarmed"). Wasn't it the NYPD who was only hitting what they were shooting at like 18% of the time? That's a very misleading statistic, and is irrelevant to the conversation. "In 2005, officers fired 472 times in the same circumstances, hitting their mark 82 times, for a 17.4 percent hit rate. They shot and killed nine people that year" As an Army Vet I am sure you would understand the statistic also includes suppressive fire and that a fire fight is anything but shooting a paper target with ear protection on... With all that being said, God forbid something happens, we will have a fighting chance before the police are able to even enter the building.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 26, 2018 22:51:09 GMT -6
I have been through three active shooter situations. Two were impromptu drills and the other was an actual case where we had a potentially armed student in the building. Potentially armed? Isn't everybody? So I'd say you've been thru a total of 0 active shooter situations. How could she know which entrance a shooter would've used?
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 26, 2018 23:01:32 GMT -6
Wasn't it the NYPD who was only hitting what they were shooting at like 18% of the time? That's a very misleading statistic, and is irrelevant to the conversation. "In 2005, officers fired 472 times in the same circumstances, hitting their mark 82 times, for a 17.4 percent hit rate. They shot and killed nine people that year" As an Army Vet I am sure you would understand the statistic also includes suppressive fire Suppressive fire? Wouldn't you want police to minimize the amount of flying lead?
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 27, 2018 5:14:29 GMT -6
Imma throw this one out there - nobody has a window in their classroom? I have an entire exterior wall made up of windows from waist high to the ceiling.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 27, 2018 5:32:09 GMT -6
Wasn't it the NYPD who was only hitting what they were shooting at like 18% of the time? That's a very misleading statistic, and is irrelevant to the conversation. "In 2005, officers fired 472 times in the same circumstances, hitting their mark 82 times, for a 17.4 percent hit rate. They shot and killed nine people that year" As an Army Vet I am sure you would understand the statistic also includes suppressive fire and that a fire fight is anything but shooting a paper target with ear protection on... With all that being said, God forbid something happens, we will have a fighting chance before the police are able to even enter the building. Sorry...couldn't resist:
|
|
|
Post by utchuckd on Feb 27, 2018 6:30:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by newt21 on Feb 27, 2018 8:05:32 GMT -6
Fortunately we have always had multiple retired NYPD on staff... they don't even go to Shoprite without packing Also the local Archdiocese has put together a fund to hire a private security company to every Catholic school in the city... the same rule applies to them (even though they are paid as "unarmed"). Wasn't it the NYPD who was only hitting what they were shooting at like 18% of the time? This statistic just makes me think of storm troopers shooting at the rebels in Star Wars
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on Feb 27, 2018 9:50:03 GMT -6
I have been through three active shooter situations. Two were impromptu drills and the other was an actual case where we had a potentially armed student in the building. Potentially armed? Isn't everybody? So I'd say you've been thru a total of 0 active shooter situations. How could she know which entrance a shooter would've used? Because it was the only entrance that was unlocked; it is an older building and that door cannot be locked during the school day because of fire code. But, Bob, please enlighten the folks on this board with your infinite wisdom. Seeing as you have added so much to our conversations over the last decade.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Feb 27, 2018 10:15:29 GMT -6
Fortunately we have always had multiple retired NYPD on staff... they don't even go to Shoprite without packing Also the local Archdiocese has put together a fund to hire a private security company to every Catholic school in the city... the same rule applies to them (even though they are paid as "unarmed"). Wasn't it the NYPD who was only hitting what they were shooting at like 18% of the time? That stat actually sounds pretty good. We fire 5-6 times and hit the shooter once. Also, if he is being shot at, he will be taking cover instead of just picking off defenseless students. If he isn't taking cover, then our hit rate goes way up.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Feb 27, 2018 17:07:19 GMT -6
Potentially armed? Isn't everybody? So I'd say you've been thru a total of 0 active shooter situations. How could she know which entrance a shooter would've used? Because it was the only entrance that was unlocked; it is an older building and that door cannot be locked during the school day because of fire code. Doesn't it make sense that they chose that door, then? They knew they could exit it and not be trapped as happened in Orlando. I give up, how much do I need to post here to get shooting scenario cred?
|
|
|
Post by 3rdandlong on Feb 27, 2018 17:44:55 GMT -6
I’m in favor of the 2nd Ammendment but I don’t understand why anyone who is not fighting in a war needs to own an assault rifle. I also know that I dont want 23 year old new teacher Ms. Smith who was just at spring break not too long ago carrying a gun on campus.
|
|
|
Post by utchuckd on Feb 27, 2018 17:54:24 GMT -6
Depends on whose definition of assault rifle we're using.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Feb 27, 2018 19:01:20 GMT -6
Depends on whose definition of assault rifle we're using. Unfortunately it is usually people like this:
|
|
|
Post by utchuckd on Feb 28, 2018 17:01:02 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by jg08mhs on Mar 1, 2018 6:06:07 GMT -6
Imma throw this one out there - nobody has a window in their classroom? Some are interior rooms, so no in that case. I don’t see daylight all day in mine. Others may be elevated a few stories. Can’t run away if your legs are broken.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Mar 1, 2018 6:08:41 GMT -6
That still leaves at least a third of all classrooms.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2018 11:39:40 GMT -6
I’m in favor of the 2nd Ammendment but I don’t understand why anyone who is not fighting in a war needs to own an assault rifle. I also know that I dont want 23 year old new teacher Ms. Smith who was just at spring break not too long ago carrying a gun on campus. The definitions of "assault rifles," especially the ones that politicians use, can be meaningless. Basically if a gun is semi-auto, black, and scary looking, then it's an "assault rifle" and gets banned... while you can still easily buy a "hunting rifle" with all the same capabilities but some wooden cosmetics and few people bat an eye. A lot of people think that limiting the size of magazines to X number would stop this, but they've already tried that. When it takes 2 seconds to change out a magazine, the size of the clip doesn't really make much difference in a mass shooting situation. One of the most disturbing things that's come to light in all of this is that cops are literally under no legal obligation to even try to protect your life in a dangerous situation. If they want to, they are free to stand around and watch you die, which is basically what the SRO and other police on the scene did for most of this shooting in Florida. They may be disciplined internally at work, but they will face no charges in court for simply letting someone kill you. The SRO in Florida simply retired with a full pension rather than face a suspension and investigation while he "did nothing" in the words of his own supervisor. With that said, I'm not in favor of bringing guns into the building or encouraging people who don't understand or respect guns to carry at school. I'm leary of allowing teachers with Concealed Carry permits to walk around schools with pistols, too. Hell, I've seen an SRO pull a gun on a kid reaching for his cellphone because he thought the kid was going for a gun. I can see that becoming a much bigger tragedy if everyone in the building is armed. Mass school shootings have become a meme now for antisocial kids with axes to grind. The idea's out there to "inspire" them, the genie's out of the bottle, and it's not going anywhere. The truth is that when experts with years of extensive training still can't even tell you how to save yourself in a school shooting, there's just not much you can do on your own. Better security at the doors is a first step, but people still want to be nice and let people in when they knock, while cash strapped schools will often let broken doors and cameras go unfixed for months or years.
|
|
|
Post by Hitch & Pitch on Mar 1, 2018 14:33:46 GMT -6
A couple of thoughts...
I like what the father whose daughter passed away in the recent shooting, I think Pollack is his last name, has to say.
You have to approach the schools as if was a courthouse, or airport, etc...
Only have one entrance point, at that point you have a security check just as TSA.
I think fencing that surrounds the schools, but an access road just inside so this can be patrolled by a vehicle.
Arming teachers, I cannot support, everyday we are seeing teachers assaulted by students who fear no consequences, now a firearm will be brought into the equation???
If "money" becomes an issue, start by eliminating certified positions that are not classroom instructors, Academic Coach, Curriculum Specialist, STEM Coordinator, I'm sure people can think of others. Administrative travel to conferences, seminars, "training" can be eliminated. Hiring "consultants" to come deliver a "re-packaged" approach to teaching can also be eliminated, until all safety precautions have been taken care of at least.
|
|
|
Post by adawg2302 on Mar 1, 2018 15:43:08 GMT -6
A couple of thoughts... I like what the father whose daughter passed away in the recent shooting, I think Pollack is his last name, has to say. You have to approach the schools as if was a courthouse, or airport, etc... Only have one entrance point, at that point you have a security check just as TSA. I think fencing that surrounds the schools, but an access road just inside so this can be patrolled by a vehicle. Arming teachers, I cannot support, everyday we are seeing teachers assaulted by students who fear no consequences, now a firearm will be brought into the equation??? If "money" becomes an issue, start by eliminating certified positions that are not classroom instructors, Academic Coach, Curriculum Specialist, STEM Coordinator, I'm sure people can think of others. Administrative travel to conferences, seminars, "training" can be eliminated. Hiring "consultants" to come deliver a "re-packaged" approach to teaching can also be eliminated, until all safety precautions have been taken care of at least. Agreed. I have had family & friends consistently ask me the last few weeks what is the solution? I never respond with the "gun control" talking point. I talk about school access. If everyone truly 100% cared about student / teacher safety, they would have schools like airports. X-ray machines, security, 1 entrance/exit, etc...there aren't too many shootings at airports, as far as I am aware. I obviously understand this will never happen. As far as $$$ goes, in my experience, there is always $$$, it just depends on how the people in charge want to use it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2018 18:00:04 GMT -6
Fire codes don't allow for schools to just have one entrance or exit. In case of a disaster or emergency, they need to be able to evacuate the building quickly or get emergency personnel in. Even courthouses and airports have multiple ways in and out.. but they have a lot of security guards to watch those. Actually, you'd be surprised how lax security actually is at many airports--the primary goal of the TSA and airport is to make you FEEL like there's a lot of security (mostly through inconveniencing you so much it seems impossible to beat), when they may actually have broken security doors that don't lock, huge gaps in the fences that allow people to sneak onto the runway, etc., not to mention how so many of the policies on what you can and can't bring on an airline really make no difference at all in terms of keeping people safe. I'm pretty sure it's a law at all schools in our state that doors are locked during school hours and no one is allowed in unless the office clears it... however, all you need to do is ring the bell, give a reason for being there, and they'll buzz you right in. At a school I used to work at, it was normal for kids who'd graduated within the last few years to randomly come back and just... hang out and visit. It also got to be a joke about how we always went to the exact same place when we had a bomb threat, so if someone really wanted to get around any security measures, they'd just call in a bomb threat and attack us as we went to our "safe" area.
|
|
|
Post by adawg2302 on Mar 1, 2018 23:38:04 GMT -6
Fire codes don't allow for schools to just have one entrance or exit. In case of a disaster or emergency, they need to be able to evacuate the building quickly or get emergency personnel in. Even courthouses and airports have multiple ways in and out.. but they have a lot of security guards to watch those. Actually, you'd be surprised how lax security actually is at many airports--the primary goal of the TSA and airport is to make you FEEL like there's a lot of security (mostly through inconveniencing you so much it seems impossible to beat), when they may actually have broken security doors that don't lock, huge gaps in the fences that allow people to sneak onto the runway, etc., not to mention how so many of the policies on what you can and can't bring on an airline really make no difference at all in terms of keeping people safe. I'm pretty sure it's a law at all schools in our state that doors are locked during school hours and no one is allowed in unless the office clears it... however, all you need to do is ring the bell, give a reason for being there, and they'll buzz you right in. At a school I used to work at, it was normal for kids who'd graduated within the last few years to randomly come back and just... hang out and visit. It also got to be a joke about how we always went to the exact same place when we had a bomb threat, so if someone really wanted to get around any security measures, they'd just call in a bomb threat and attack us as we went to our "safe" area. At least there seems to protocol for visitors in your state, an actual "entrance". Now whether or not people follow it, are serious about it is a different conversation. My campus literally has no secure boundary anywhere. Having a campus that appears to be secure would be an improvement over a campus that has no boundary anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by jg08mhs on Mar 2, 2018 5:48:46 GMT -6
That still leaves at least a third of all classrooms. Right. I think everyone here would agree that if you have a reasonable chance to get you and your students out, you should take it.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Mar 2, 2018 5:58:42 GMT -6
Probably, but the conversation steered directly to insecticide pillboxes.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Mar 2, 2018 9:54:39 GMT -6
Actually, you'd be surprised how lax security actually is at many airports--the primary goal of the TSA and airport is to make you FEEL like there's a lot of security (mostly through inconveniencing you so much it seems impossible to beat), when they may actually have broken security doors that don't lock, huge gaps in the fences that allow people to sneak onto the runway, etc., not to mention how so many of the policies on what you can and can't bring on an airline really make no difference at all in terms of keeping people safe. Actually it's not even that; it's to convince the gen'l public that something is being done. The thrust of it is not the safety of the passengers, but of people on the ground vs. planes deliberately being crashed into them. Polls taken a few yrs. ago show the bulk of support for the security measures is from people who don't fly, at the expense of people who do. Ultimately the theatrics of all stuff like this has to do with, not the total amount of crime or violence, but its aggregation. As was pointed out re the .44 killer at the time, as well as in the later movie Summer of Sam, a big tsimmes was made out of the minuscule fraction of murders in NYC in the peak era of violence there because those murders were connected, as opposed to all the disconnected ones going on at the same time. These are remarkably safe times we're living in in the USA, statistically. You'd need a great slough of slaughters like the present one to get back to the level of violence in schools on avg. that used to exist. If the idea is to prevent, not violence, but the spectacular conjunction of violence, then the thing to do would be to act like there's an epidemic of contagious disease: Don't congregate. Your friend is your enemy when somebody's shooting at you. Keep crowds from forming. Spread people out so they'll have to be murdered piecemeal, a process that won't make headlines. Close the schools & have only private tutoring or online instruction. Close retail stores & have everything purchased online & shipped to individual consumers. No live entertainment or movies. Sports like tennis, bowling, or wrestling OK but no team sports. No hospitals or clinics, only house calls. Crazy? Pretty much, yeah, although early in the atomic era there was thought given to abandoning cities to take away bomb targets. But that could actually be effective if you have just a few of such powerful weapons. With bullets, the amount of gain by spreading people out so the shooter has to travel from victim to victim is slight, except when it comes to preventing headlines. The irony is that in such a spread-out world, a killer could go from person to person & shoot or stab them dead, & w nobody finding their bodies until hours later the body count could really be racked up, but nobody would notice.
|
|
|
Post by somecoach on Mar 2, 2018 14:14:23 GMT -6
Suppressive fire? Wouldn't you want police to minimize the amount of flying lead? That's "Monday Morning Quarterbacking"...
|
|