NationStates Jolt Archive

Texas school tells classes to fight back

By JEFF CARLTON, Associated Press Writer Fri Oct 13, 2:42 PM ET

BURLESON, Texas - Youngsters in a suburban Fort Worth school district are being taught not to sit there like good boys and girls with their hands folded if a gunman invades the classroom, but to rush him and hit him with everything they got — books, pencils, legs and arms.

"Getting under desks and praying for rescue from professionals is not a recipe for success," said Robin Browne, a major in the British Army reserve and an instructor for Response Options, the company providing the training to the Burleson schools.

That kind of fight-back advice is all but unheard of among schools, and some fear it will get children killed.

But school officials in Burleson said they are drawing on the lessons learned from a string of disasters such as Columbine in 1999 and the Amish schoolhouse attack in Pennsylvania last week.

The school system in this working-class suburb of about 26,000 is believed to be the first in the nation to train all its teachers and students to fight back, Browne said.

At Burleson — which has 10 schools and about 8,500 students — the training covers various emergencies, such as tornadoes, fires and situations where first aid is required. Among the lessons: Use a belt as a sling for broken bones, and shoelaces make good tourniquets.

Students are also instructed not to comply with a gunman's orders, and to take him down.

Browne recommends students and teachers "react immediately to the sight of a gun by picking up anything and everything and throwing it at the head and body of the attacker and making as much noise as possible. Go toward him as fast as we can and bring them down."

Response Options trains students and teachers to "lock onto the attacker's limbs and use their body weight," Browne said. Everyday classroom objects, such as paperbacks and pencils, can become weapons.

"We show them they can win," he said. "The fact that someone walks into a classroom with a gun does not make them a god. Five or six seventh-grade kids and a 95-pound art teacher can basically challenge, bring down and immobilize a 200-pound man with a gun."

The fight-back training parallels the change in thinking that has occurred since Sept. 11, when United Flight 93 made it clear that the usual advice during a hijacking — Don't try to be a hero, and no one will get hurt — no longer holds. Flight attendants and passengers are now encouraged to rush the cockpit.

Similarly, women and youngsters are often told by safety experts to kick, scream and claw they way out during a rape attempt or a child-snatching.

In 1998 in Oregon, a 17-year-old high school wrestling star with a bullet in his chest stopped a rampage by tackling a teenager who had opened fire in the cafeteria. The gunman killed two students, as well as his parents, and 22 other were wounded.

Hilda Quiroz of the National School Safety Center, a nonprofit advocacy group in California, said she knows of no other school system in the country that is offering fight-back training, and found the strategy at Burleson troubling.

"If kids are saved, then this is the most wonderful thing in the world. If kids are killed, people are going to wonder who's to blame," she said. "How much common sense will a student have in a time of panic?"

Terry Grisham, spokesman for the Tarrant County Sheriff's Department, said he, too, had concerns, though he had not seen details of the program.

"You're telling kids to do what a tactical officer is trained to do, and they have a lot of guns and ballistic shields," he said. "If my school was teaching that, I'd be upset, frankly."

Some students said they appreciate the training.

"It's harder to hit a moving target than a target that is standing still," said 14-year-old Jessica Justice, who received the training over the summer during freshman orientation at Burleson High.

William Lassiter, manager of the North Carolina-based Center for Prevention of School Violence, said past attacks indicate that fighting back, at least by teachers and staff, has its merits.

"At Columbine, teachers told students to get down and get on the floors, and gunmen went around and shot people on the floors," Lassiter said. "I know this sounds chaotic and I know it doesn't sound like a great solution, but it's better than leaving them there to get shot."

Lassiter questioned, however, whether students should be included in the fight-back training: "That's going to scare the you-know-what out of them."

Most of the freshman class at Burleson's high school underwent instruction during orientation, and eventually all Burleson students will receive some training, even the elementary school children.

"We want them to know if Miss Valley says to run out of the room screaming, that is exactly what they need to do," said Jeanie Gilbert, district director of emergency management. She said students and teachers should have "a fighting chance in every situation."

"It's terribly sad that when I get up in the morning that I have to wonder what may happen today either in our area or in the nation," Gilbert said. "Something that happens in Pennsylvania has that ripple effect across the country."

Burleson High Principal Paul Cash said he has received no complaints from parents about the training. Stacy Vaughn, the president of the Parent-Teacher Organization at Norwood Elementary in Burleson, supports the program.

"I feel like our kids should be armed with the information that these types of possibilities exist," Vaughn said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061013/ap_on_re_us/defending_the_classroom

This scares me as much as that idiot in WI wanting to arm teachers. I could see escape and evade plans, but having students outright attacking someone with a gun?

Having said that, I could see such training for teachers, so we could try and take down an attacker in our school, but kids should be taught to get the hell away as fast and as best as they can.

Your thoughts and feelings on this?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061013/ap_on_re_us/defending_the_classroom

This scares me as much as that idiot in WI wanting to arm teachers. I could see escape and evade plans, but having students outright attacking someone with a gun?

Having said that, I could see such training for teachers, so we could try and take down an attacker in our school, but kids should be taught to get the hell away as fast and as best as they can.

Your thoughts and feelings on this?

I suppose if the gunman is having stuff thrown at his head he'll find it harder to accurately shoot anyone.

I suppose if the gunman is having stuff thrown at his head he'll find it harder to accurately shoot anyone.
As I am told, with assult weapons, that isn't too much of a problem.

I suppose if the gunman is having stuff thrown at his head he'll find it harder to accurately shoot anyone.

or he'll just kill indiscriminately

As I am told, with assult weapons, that isn't too much of a problem.

I've got it! A trap door just by the entrance into the classroom. A gunman strolls in, teacher pushes secret trap door button. Gunman falls into bottomless pit.

*dusts hands*

I always thought that when the guy has his back turned, they could jump him, disarm him, and then pound the shit out of him.

I've got it! A trap door just by the entrance into the classroom. A gunman strolls in, teacher pushes secret trap door button. Gunman falls into bottomless pit.

*dusts hands*
*Gets a mental image of being able to dump anyone into a pit ala Ilpalazzo*
I could go for that idea, yes. :D

I think the trap door idea is good....serously.\:mp5:/
_____________________________________ l^^^l

A Trap door with spikes in the pit!!

Five or six seventh-grade kids and a 95-pound art teacher can basically challenge, bring down and immobilize a 200-pound man with a gun."

There's a difference between a 95 pound art teacher with a few runts and
In 1998 in Oregon, a 17-year-old high school wrestling star with a bullet in his chest stopped a rampage..
a 17 year old wrestling star.

Screw it, why not just give teachers guns? That would solve the problem right? :rolleyes:

(That may just happen given enough time)

I've got it! A trap door just by the entrance into the classroom. A gunman strolls in, teacher pushes secret trap door button. Gunman falls into bottomless pit.

*dusts hands*

But what about abuse of this system?

"James, you're late again!"
"But I... AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!"

While it certainly sounds stupid, I wonder how much merit it has. In time of a shooting, like, say Columbine, could the students have gotten out of the library, where they were trapped? No, so they were sitting ducks for being killed. Under a fight-back doctorine, they might have managed to immobilize the attackers.

It's not totally crazy.

Just almost totally.

I still think that the best option is the "Run like fucking hell" option, but that's just me.

I agree with the run like hell option too but if you're trapped you should use the desks to barricade the doors rather than too hide under.

this is definitely the way to go.
a few friends and i were discussing this idea last year, when we were in school. storming the attacker is so much better than cowering under tables. we realised that some may die, but better have one or two die as heroes than have a whole class wiped out without raising a finger.

i'd be better to try to fight the reasons why somebody would shoot students. then they wouldn't have to care about all this.
guns as natural right to protect you.. bullshit.

i'd be better to try to fight the reasons why somebody would shoot students. then they wouldn't have to care about all this.
guns as natural right to protect you.. bullshit.

But they're already trying to ban violent video games.

Think about it from the gunmans point of view, you burst into a class waving a gun, everyone runs at you. What do you do? Spray and pray, depending on your gun you may be able to kill or seriously injure enough of your counter-attackers to show them that running at an armed and crazy individual is a very bad idea.

We also need to teach elementary school kids how to do heart surgery as well. More kids die from heart failure then they do from gunshots from terrorists.

As I am told, with assult weapons, that isn't too much of a problem.

Please post in what school schooting an assault weapon was used. AFAIK, there never has been.

Think about it from the gunmans point of view, you burst into a class waving a gun, everyone runs at you. What do you do? Spray and pray, depending on your gun you may be able to kill or seriously injure enough of your counter-attackers to show them that running at an armed and crazy individual is a very bad idea.

Do you have *any* experience with guns?

A moving target is MUCH harder to hit than a sitting one. Just getting up and running makes it much more likely for the kids to survive.

Now, if they actually attack him, he may get off a shot. Perhaps two. Yes, someone may get hurt. But the odds of 10 elementary school girls (for example) being lined up and (5 fatally) shot quickly approaches zero.

It does my heart good to see that not everybody is being raised to be submissive,wuss. Maybe if more people would stand up for themselves (and others) the world would be a better place.

Oh and of course, the fact that this is happening in Texas, where people are still born with balls, comes as no surprise.

Please post in what school schooting an assault weapon was used. AFAIK, there never has been.
I never claimed there was, I just noted that with an assult weapon and a spraying abilty, moving targets don't become that much of a problem.

Now, if they actually attack him, he may get off a shot. Perhaps two. Yes, someone may get hurt. But the odds of 10 elementary school girls (for example) being lined up and (5 fatally) shot quickly approaches zero.
Students should be getting OUT of the class, not going after the gunman. They have no buisness going after someone like that.

Do you have *any* experience with guns? No actually.

A moving target is MUCH harder to hit than a sitting one. Just getting up and running makes it much more likely for the kids to survive.
The kids are being told to rush the attacker, as in run right at them. Surely it's easier to hit something coming right as opposed to something running away from you?
Now, if they actually attack him, he may get off a shot. Perhaps two. Yes, someone may get hurt. But the odds of 10 elementary school girls (for example) being lined up and (5 fatally) shot quickly approaches zero.
Wouldn't that depend largely on the gun being used?

Do you have *any* experience with guns?

A moving target is MUCH harder to hit than a sitting one. Just getting up and running makes it much more likely for the kids to survive.

Now, if they actually attack him, he may get off a shot. Perhaps two. Yes, someone may get hurt. But the odds of 10 elementary school girls (for example) being lined up and (5 fatally) shot quickly approaches zero.

Agreed.

It does my heart good to see that not everybody is being raised to be submissive,wuss. Maybe if more people would stand up for themselves (and others) the world would be a better place.

True.

Oh and of course, the fact that this is happening in Texas, where people are still born with balls, comes as no surprise.

As a fellow Texan, all I can add is :D:D:D

Students should be getting OUT of the class, not going after the gunman. They have no buisness going after someone like that.

Please explain *how* you get out of a room with a gunman there? You think he's just going to turn around and let them all escape? :rolleyes:

If they want to live, they may.

No actually.


The kids are being told to rush the attacker, as in run right at them. Surely it's easier to hit something coming right as opposed to something running away from you?

Wouldn't that depend largely on the gun being used?

That may be a part of the problem. Guns don't make one invincible, they just make one deadly at a distance. The idea is to take the situation from slaughter to almost certain death to likely or even unlikely death.
Most anti-gun folks (which you may or may not be) don't realize this.

Most school rooms have only one door, so in almost ALL cases the only way out is to run PASSING BY the gunman!

Not really. You still have to point and shoot. If 1 or 2 people are rushing you, you may or may not get knocked to the ground and may kill them. 4 or 6 or 15? The gunman is screwed -- there is NO WAY (even in the absurdly highly unlikely event that he had an AK-47 or something) that he'd be able to effectively shoot ANYone, much less everyone.

Try it out. Get some friends in an average sized living room with furniture and have 3 or 4 of them rush you. See how long you'd have to react. Heck, even have one throw some keys or something at you. It's amazing what a break a distraction can be.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061013/ap_on_re_us/defending_the_classroom

This scares me as much as that idiot in WI wanting to arm teachers. I could see escape and evade plans, but having students outright attacking someone with a gun?

Having said that, I could see such training for teachers, so we could try and take down an attacker in our school, but kids should be taught to get the hell away as fast and as best as they can.

Your thoughts and feelings on this?

Well, it's a lot better than the plans to arm Japanese teachers with sasumata (http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/waiwai/archive/news/2004/02/20040212p2g00m0dm998000c.html) after the 2001 Ikeda elementary school Massacre...

Well, it's a lot better than the plans to arm Japanese teachers with sasumata (http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/waiwai/archive/news/2004/02/20040212p2g00m0dm998000c.html) after the 2001 Ikeda elementary school Massacre...

http://www1.cts.ne.jp/~tachiai/sasumata11.jpg

It's not the worst idea, either... there is no blade so it's not like they're bringing back the naginata or the katana or some lethal weapon.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061013/ap_on_re_us/defending_the_classroom

This scares me as much as that idiot in WI wanting to arm teachers. I could see escape and evade plans, but having students outright attacking someone with a gun?

Having said that, I could see such training for teachers, so we could try and take down an attacker in our school, but kids should be taught to get the hell away as fast and as best as they can.

Your thoughts and feelings on this?
In Detroit for a long time they have been telling people to not comply with carjackers but to resist, as in MOST cases they will just shoot you anyway.
WHere if you can offer some resistance they will have less success in killing you.

I can assure you no man no matter how crazy can take out 25 kids throwing books and chairs---you will not John Woo your way around that.
The key is in what seems to be being presented--the students must take the initiative, they can not hesistate and allow the man to brace himself it must be like the angry mob with torches and pitch forks.

I can attest to having things thrown at me by someone who didnt want to fight me and I though I could man up and walk through it--I was wrong, I was kept completely at bay. Now since it was one person if I had had a gun I would certainly have shot him(well no, but for the point of my post) but now twenty people lobbing two pound books, deskes and chairs it would be very hard to get a shot off, plus two or three fifteen year old boys and teacher could over power a man.

I am not saying this wont end badly, but doesnt it already end badly?

Please explain *how* you get out of a room with a gunman there? You think he's just going to turn around and let them all escape? :rolleyes:

If they want to live, they may.
I did say that escape and evade would be a good class for students, as well as training teachers, but you want to look me in the eye and say that you're fine if your child got blown to bits when he was told to charge a guy with a gun?

By arming students with martial arts skills, you can turn their hands and feet into lethal weapons. It can go a long way in building confidence in those who have been bullied because they will then feel enpowered and won't put up with someone else's shit and because they can fight back, the bullies will back off and we can avert gun rampages.

These rampages occur sometimes as an offshoot of a victim being driven over the edge by chronic bullying.

Yes, there are those who have their own vendettas, but, this will stop a certain margin, and will help end the culture of bullying because the victims will have power.

That power is intoxicating.

I speak from personal experience.

I was bullied, and now I have my black stripe (one down from black belt) in Tae Kwon-do.

Kids bullied me from grade 4-8...

They started backing down in grade 8 when word got around about me being trained to stand up for myself. All it took in grade 9 was encountering the girl who severely bullied me and making it known I'd never tolerate her shit again and damn did she quiver in her shoes.

But, it didn't hurt that I was suddenly a little bigger than her, and by the end of grade 13, she was tiny compared to me, and I had her kissing my ass. She never got in my way, and others who had bullied apologised.

Did they grow up, maybe? Did they fear what I had threatened to do to this girl? Quite possibly.

Learning how to fight can very quickly level the playing field.

Children and teens like to pick on the weak. Those who can fight won't be considered weak even if they are small.

Well, it's a lot better than the plans to arm Japanese teachers with sasumata (http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/waiwai/archive/news/2004/02/20040212p2g00m0dm998000c.html) after the 2001 Ikeda elementary school Massacre...
I always thought just having the kendo gear around would work just as well, having the reach and the ability to pound the hell out of people.

My school did hold a drill for teachers about it though, and priority one was getting the kids out the door while the teacher took on the bad guy as a distraction.

I did say that escape and evade would be a good class for students, as well as training teachers, but you want to look me in the eye and say that you're fine if your child got blown to bits when he was told to charge a guy with a gun?

Escape and evade is the first choice, of course. This is the last. You're fine if your child sits there like a sheep and gets blown to bits?

In these school schootings, almost ALL of them have had suicides at the end or included suicide pacts (that somehow didn't follow through).
In that sort of situation, yes, I'D take the risk. Having the kids know what to do if it looks like they need to stop themselves from becoming corpses is a GOOD thing.

It's not the worst idea, either... there is no blade so it's not like they're bringing back the naginata or the katana or some lethal weapon.

Oh for sure. But the point was that teaching the kids to respond pro-actively instead of passively is better still.

(I will say I'd like to see naginata re-introduced, but that's due to personal bias, as i trained in naginata. ;))

I did say that escape and evade would be a good class for students, as well as training teachers, but you want to look me in the eye and say that you're fine if your child got blown to bits when he was told to charge a guy with a gun?

As Skibereen said, it ends badly either way, but at least if pro-active steps are taught, it'll likely end less badly.

In Detroit for a long time they have been telling people to not comply with carjackers but to resist, as in MOST cases they will just shoot you anyway.
WHere if you can offer some resistance they will have less success in killing you.

I can assure you no man no matter how crazy can take out 25 kids throwing books and chairs---you will not John Woo your way around that.
The key is in what seems to be being presented--the students must take the initiative, they can not hesistate and allow the man to brace himself it must be like the angry mob with torches and pitch forks.

I can attest to having things thrown at me by someone who didnt want to fight me and I though I could man up and walk through it--I was wrong, I was kept completely at bay. Now since it was one person if I had had a gun I would certainly have shot him(well no, but for the point of my post) but now twenty people lobbing two pound books, deskes and chairs it would be very hard to get a shot off, plus two or three fifteen year old boys and teacher could over power a man.

I am not saying this wont end badly, but doesnt it already end badly?
Yes, but here is how I see it. A guy charges in with a gun. Someone throws something at him. He shoots and manages to seriously hurt/kill a student.

These are children, do you REALLY think they'll keep going after that? That they will keep charging under the idea that survival of the group is more important than their own?

I don't. And reading the interviews of kids who have been there, I really don't see it.

I do see at least one dead kid and a REALLY pissed off attacker who may decide a little revenge is in order.

By arming students with martial arts skills, you can turn their hands and feet into lethal weapons. It can go a long way in building confidence in those who have been bullied because they will then feel enpowered and won't put up with someone else's shit and because they can fight back, the bullies will back off.....

If students are taught martial arts then the bullies will be just as well or better trained than those they are bullying, so I don't know about it reducing bullying.

If students are taught martial arts then the bullies will be just as well or better trained than those they are bullying, so I don't know about it reducing bullying.
Bullies pick on the weak and they travel in packs.

The weak can counter in two ways; they too can travel in packs, or they can be seen as something beyond "weak". I believe the sheer fear of knowing that the weak are able to defend themselves makes a bully seek new meat.

I always thought just having the kendo gear around would work just as well, having the reach and the ability to pound the hell out of people.

My school did hold a drill for teachers about it though, and priority one was getting the kids out the door while the teacher took on the bad guy as a distraction.

I'd agree that's the ideal situation. But there always needs to be an alternate....

Escape and evade is the first choice, of course. This is the last. -snip- Having the kids know what to do if it looks like they need to stop themselves from becoming corpses is a GOOD thing.

Exactly so.

I'd agree that's the ideal situation. But there always needs to be an alternate....
Alternate planning yes, asking children to put themselves at even more risk though...

Bullies pick on the weak and they travel in packs.

The weak can counter in two ways; they too can travel in packs, or they can be seen as something beyond "weak". I believe the sheer fear of knowing that the weak are able to defend themselves makes a bully seek new meat.

Say the bully was in your class. Chances are he's stronger than you(thus the position as a bully), and if he's in the same class it would stand to reason that he had recieved the same amount of training in whatever martial art it is as you and everyone else in the class. Said bully would still have the advantage after the training, he has been trained and is physicaly stronger than you.

Say the bully was in your class. Chances are he's stronger than you(thus the position as a bully), and if he's in the same class it would stand to reason that he had recieved the same amount of training in whatever martial art it is as you and everyone else in the class. Said bully would still have the advantage after the training, he has been trained and is physicaly stronger than you.
Yes, but, you will fight back now, and they would rather have a victim who doesn't. Someone who fights back is troublesome. Besides, even if the bully is strong, you could be fast...

Yes, but, you will fight back now, and they would rather have a victim who doesn't. Someone who fights back is troublesome. Besides, even if the bully is strong, you could be fast...

And I guess it might depend on the martial art. IMS ninjitsu has little to do with physical strength

And I guess it might depend on the martial art. IMS ninjitsu has little to do with physical strength
Same with Tae Kwon-do. Wehad to learn how to concentrate force. If you were strong, but couldn't focus force, you were worse off than the person who wasn't as strong who could focus force.

We didn't built build big muscles; the art builds long, lean muscles that aren't always obvious.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061013/ap_on_re_us/defending_the_classroom

This scares me as much as that idiot in WI wanting to arm teachers. I could see escape and evade plans, but having students outright attacking someone with a gun?

Having said that, I could see such training for teachers, so we could try and take down an attacker in our school, but kids should be taught to get the hell away as fast and as best as they can.

Your thoughts and feelings on this?


Look at these school shootings, especially Columbine, the children who were killed were often trying to hide or begging for sympathy. The monsters shot them anyway because they were easy targets. These ghouls target schools specifically because they are easy targets.

Now I do not think kids should be encouraged to charge the gunman but they should be taught basic self defense and offensive fighting moves as well as how to disarm an assailant...just in case.

armed police officers should also patrol schools if needed but i really hope our schools do not have to be turned into a fortress. that is no kind of learning environment.

And I guess it might depend on the martial art. IMS ninjitsu has little to do with physical strength

interesting, what exactly does Ninjitsu rely on? I always thought it was the style ninja's used...usually full of sneak attacks an such.

maybe i watch too much TV.

Everyone should know how to fight and be ready to defend themselves.

interesting, what exactly does Ninjitsu rely on? I always thought it was the style ninja's used...usually full of sneak attacks an such.

maybe i watch too much TV.

Control and balance I tihnk. I've never done any, I was going to, and I got some manner of spiel about how it's better than shaolin kung fu(cos you don't get punched), but it conflicted with other things.

Everyone should know how to fight and be ready to defend themselves.

But don't people get arrested for defending themselves? That's just what I heard at my school, that if someone attacks you and you fight back, you get arrested, too.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061013/ap_on_re_us/defending_the_classroom

This scares me as much as that idiot in WI wanting to arm teachers. I could see escape and evade plans, but having students outright attacking someone with a gun?

Having said that, I could see such training for teachers, so we could try and take down an attacker in our school, but kids should be taught to get the hell away as fast and as best as they can.

Your thoughts and feelings on this?

And yet I believe that the kid with the shotgun in WI was taken down by several students and the custodian dogpiling on him.

I think guns in the classroom is horribly stupid, but unfortunately these rampages have shown that people WILL get killed if they do nothing.

But don't people get arrested for defending themselves? That's just what I heard at my school, that if someone attacks you and you fight back, you get arrested, too.

If the police find you fighting with someone they'll arrest both suspects until the story comes out.

But not if a crazed gunman comes to your school.

Students should be getting OUT of the class, not going after the gunman. They have no buisness going after someone like that.

That assumes they have an exit route. And if he's standing in the only door?

But don't people get arrested for defending themselves? That's just what I heard at my school, that if someone attacks you and you fight back, you get arrested, too.

It really depends on the situation and the laws in your particular location as well as your attitude when the cops show up. The only time the police responded to a fight when I was still there they arrested the other guy and his girlfriend and sent me home. This was a fight in the parking lot of a bar, not in a school.

If the police find you fighting with someone they'll arrest both suspects until the story comes out.

But not if a crazed gunman comes to your school.

That makes sense. But how can you defend against a gun?

But don't people get arrested for defending themselves? That's just what I heard at my school, that if someone attacks you and you fight back, you get arrested, too.

Would you rather be stomped or killed?

That makes sense. But how can you defend against a gun?

See above, by reading back through the thread.

See above.
Well, there's a spider on my ceiling, but I'm not sure how that makes it any less stupid to arm people in the classroom...

Well, there's a spider on my ceiling, but I'm not sure how that makes it any less stupid to arm people in the classroom...

What are you talking about? this thread is about whether its a good idea to train school pupils to take down a gunman should their be a school shooting.

Well, there's a spider on my ceiling, but I'm not sure how that makes it any less stupid to arm people in the classroom...

Better?

What are you talking about? this thread is about whether its a good idea to train school pupils to take down a gunman should their be a school shooting.
Aye, I'm confusing this with something else that was around a few days ago about arming teachers - but my initial disgust at the idea of teaching children to attack gunmen stands.

Better?
You're a star as ever.

I have spent years as a US. Marine, and I can tell you from over 20yrs. of experience, that attacking a would-be attacker is always a a better idea than, just sitting there. All of the training that I have received and given during my time as a Marine, and as a private security consultant, tells me that teaching people to fight back is the correct thing to do.

I believe it's a good idea to be teaching them that. It's under the assumption that the attacker has gotten into the classroom, meaning it's likely that there is no chance of them surviving if he opened fire and they just sat there. Besides, it would teach them some form of teamwork related self-defence.

I have spent years as a US. Marine, and I can tell you from over 20yrs. of experience, that attacking a would-be attacker is always a a better idea than, just sitting there. All of the training that I have received and given during my time as a Marine, and as a private security consultant, tells me that teaching people to fight back is the correct thing to do.

For a rational adult? Yes, usually. However, for a child? I doubt that in a time of confusion and danger, a child would be able to muster the courage to fight back. Natural instinct is hard to override, no matter what the training, and the natural thing to do is run and flee. For children, even moreso. Hell, most adults would probably run. It's not that there isn't any fight in these people, but when someone is pointing a gun at you, the rational is usually that of run than fight.

I'd much rather the kids not charge the would-be gunman. After dropping one child down, it is very possible a "freeze in terror" could happen. And a pissed off gunman would have no problem making a terrible problem even worse. Throwing things? Yes, if the need arises, solely as a distraction. However, the children should get out as soon as possible. Confrontation against a man with a gun may not turn out well.

They should be taught to defend themselves with martial arts. After all, knowledge of karate or jujitsu can be helpful in certain situations. (They are not just to look pretty. After all, in Japan, police are trained in Aikido, kendo was made by samurai to keep up their skills, and karate was often used Okinawa [I think it was used in the military])

For a rational adult? Yes, usually. However, for a child? I doubt that in a time of confusion and danger, a child would be able to muster the courage to fight back. Natural instinct is hard to override, no matter what the training, and the natural thing to do is run and flee. For children, even moreso. Hell, most adults would probably run. It's not that there isn't any fight in these people, but when someone is pointing a gun at you, the rational is usually that of run than fight.

I'd much rather the kids not charge the would-be gunman. After dropping one child down, it is very possible a "freeze in terror" could happen. And a pissed off gunman would have no problem making a terrible problem even worse. Throwing things? Yes, if the need arises, solely as a distraction. However, the children should get out as soon as possible. Confrontation against a man with a gun may not turn out well.


What about High schools where most of the incidents happen? The pupils arn't really children and I read an article about a 17 year old guy who stabbed an intruder in his home.

I never claimed there was, I just noted that with an assult weapon and a spraying abilty, moving targets don't become that much of a problem.

Actually, the "spray and pray" method isn't remotely as effective as you'd think. You might hit something, but primarily all you're going to do is make a lot of noise and scare people. The weapon climbs when you fire, so the first couple of rounds will be in the general vicinity of the target (this is assuming you're not aiming, but tucking the stock under your arm to control the climb) but the rest will go high and will be extremely inaccurate. And if you're actually aiming with the first few shots the subsequent shots will go even higher because the weapon isn't being stabilised. And that's even true using an M16, which has relatively little kick and climb. An AK-47 (I fired both when I was in the Army and I own an AK now) is right out, it climbs rather quickly.

Still, this is a lot more sensible than arming the teachers. I think that would cause a lot more problems than it would solve.

Well, I've always thought that the standard procedure of hiding under your desk was a stupid idea (Maybe if we can't see him, he can't see us!). In most of my classrooms there is only one way out. Rushing the gunman and disarming him is a much better solution than to sit around and be systematically killed.

Really. I don't see what's so wrong about teaching kids (I still fit in that category) how NOT to die in a situation like that.

Actually, the "spray and pray" method isn't remotely as effective as you'd think. You might hit something, but primarily all you're going to do is make a lot of noise and scare people. The weapon climbs when you fire, so the first couple of rounds will be in the general vicinity of the target (this is assuming you're not aiming, but tucking the stock under your arm to control the climb) but the rest will go high and will be extremely inaccurate. And if you're actually aiming with the first few shots the subsequent shots will go even higher because the weapon isn't being stabilised. And that's even true using an M16, which has relatively little kick and climb. An AK-47 (I fired both when I was in the Army and I own an AK now) is right out, it climbs rather quickly.

Still, this is a lot more sensible than arming the teachers. I think that would cause a lot more problems than it would solve.

We have a winner! And most weapons used in school shootings are semi-auto, I think, which makes spraying even harder to do.

It's better than sitting like a lame duck...

Let's roll!

If possible, I would try to do something.

We have a winner! And most weapons used in school shootings are semi-auto, I think, which makes spraying even harder to do.

Since full-auto weapons are extremely difficult to get hold of, I'd say they probably were semi-auto.

What about High schools where most of the incidents happen? The pupils arn't really children and I read an article about a 17 year old guy who stabbed an intruder in his home.

The rationale remains. People want to save their own hides. The most rational(not necessarily in reality, but in thought processes) way to go to flee, not fight. It's a natural instinct. It can be overcome, but even with training, it is very difficult. Adrenaline reduces one's ability to think coherently, to a small extent, and natural instinct tends to take over. To flee is the common instinct, as it is the most effective(naturally speaking) way to survive against a better equipped individual.

Also, circumstances must be taken into account. Different circumstances require different tactics.

I'm in favour of self-defence. They teach that in the school curriculum here where I live... but only to girls...

This scares me as much as that idiot in WI wanting to arm teachers. I could see escape and evade plans, but having students outright attacking someone with a gun?

Having said that, I could see such training for teachers, so we could try and take down an attacker in our school, but kids should be taught to get the hell away as fast and as best as they can.

Your thoughts and feelings on this?

It's likely that some of them will be shot and killed,but hoipefuly fewer than if they just sat there waiting to be shot.

While it certainly sounds stupid, I wonder how much merit it has. In time of a shooting, like, say Columbine, could the students have gotten out of the library, where they were trapped? No, so they were sitting ducks for being killed. Under a fight-back doctorine, they might have managed to immobilize the attackers.

It's not totally crazy.

Just almost totally.

I still think that the best option is the "Run like fucking hell" option, but that's just me.

Now if you're caught in the CHEM LAB, well then let the fun begin . . .

The problem with this is that it assumes that all children will take part in the assault and that they have infinite morale. Let us suppose that in a class of 30, all of them rush the gunman. Now, seeing as how these are children, they will likely fall over in pain after being shot once.
Let A be the gunmans accuracy, on a scale of 0 to 1
Let B be the number of bullets he has in his gun
Let C be the number of children he has to shoot before the rest lose faith and run away.
Then, the gunman fails if A*B < C

I dont really like the idea of children being taught to make a mad dash for a gunner. Instead make a compulsary martial arts gym class. I think the best one would be Judo. This art involves less direct assault than other popular arts, so school children will be hard-pressed to try to use it against a single classmate for a schoolyard scuffle, and yet several of them could easily take down a gunman.

I dont really like the idea of children being taught to make a mad dash for a gunner. Instead make a compulsary martial arts gym class. I think the best one would be Judo. This art involves less direct assault than other popular arts, so school children will be hard-pressed to try to use it against a single classmate for a schoolyard scuffle, and yet several of them could easily take down a gunman.

"Martial arts are organized uselessness." - Bruce Lee

Look, we're not talking about giving kids a hobby/ongoing weekly training here. This is more like fire safety or the old nuclear attack drills.

We must teach the kids to put their natural skills to good use. Nobody can shoot straight when subjected to an atomic wedgie. :)

Sounds very ... Texan.

I don't see why everyone is such a baby about these things. With a gunman in the room, somebody's bound to get shot. Why let them be so special? Put better, why let somebody shoot your friend? Or your teacher? Kick ass.

I remember hearing a story about how this kid came to school (high school) and took out a gun in class. He made everyone leave and kept some other girls in the class with him. I remember saying, "Those idiots! Why didn't they fight him?" I mean, think about it! You're probably going to get killed anyway, so at least die nobly! Five girls against one boy with a gun? Who do think is going to win? (The girls is the answer.)

Don't mess with Texas :D

But what about abuse of this system?

"James, you're late again!"
"But I... AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!"


ROFL... "We show them they can win," he said. "The fact that someone walks into a classroom with a gun does not make them a god. Five or six seventh-grade kids and a 95-pound art teacher can basically challenge, bring down and immobilize a 200-pound man with a gun."

So..After mowing down 2-3 kids the otehr will eb to scared to do anything... So no hunmen will come in kill the teacher and the reast are to scared to even try..

Good. It's about time.

I dont really like the idea of children being taught to make a mad dash for a gunner. Instead make a compulsary martial arts gym class. I think the best one would be Judo. This art involves less direct assault than other popular arts, so school children will be hard-pressed to try to use it against a single classmate for a schoolyard scuffle, and yet several of them could easily take down a gunman.
Aikido is even better at lower levels as a pure defensive martial art, as is Wing Chun.

ROFL... "We show them they can win," he said. "The fact that someone walks into a classroom with a gun does not make them a god. Five or six seventh-grade kids and a 95-pound art teacher can basically challenge, bring down and immobilize a 200-pound man with a gun."

So..After mowing down 2-3 kids the otehr will eb to scared to do anything... So no hunmen will come in kill the teacher and the reast are to scared to even try..

You're right. It's so much nicer when they sit still at their desks and die in neat rows. :rolleyes:

You're right. It's so much nicer when they sit still at their desks and die in neat rows. :rolleyes:
Depends - with some aggressors it might be - the children should be taught to respond according to the circumstances.

While it certainly sounds stupid, I wonder how much merit it has. In time of a shooting, like, say Columbine, could the students have gotten out of the library, where they were trapped? No, so they were sitting ducks for being killed. Under a fight-back doctorine, they might have managed to immobilize the attackers.

It's not totally crazy.

Just almost totally.

I still think that the best option is the "Run like fucking hell" option, but that's just me.


Support!

:D Count on Americans to come up with the craziest shit imaginable.

I wonder if american children are trained to rape strangers who offer them candy?

For once an idea from Texas isn't a bad one. (NASA facilities aside...)

You're right. It's so much nicer when they sit still at their desks and die in neat rows. :rolleyes:

If kids charge an attacker and get killed because of it I can only speculate on what the consequences would be for the school. You know they would be held liable for getting the kids killed.

It does my heart good to see that not everybody is being raised to be submissive,wuss. Maybe if more people would stand up for themselves (and others) the world would be a better place.

Oh and of course, the fact that this is happening in Texas, where people are still born with balls, comes as no surprise.
QUOTED FOR 100% TRUTH! ^^^

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Somehow, the fact that people are advocating that I should just stand still and get shot instead of resisting isn't sitting well with me.

Honestly, preventing casualties is a good thing. It doesn't matter than 1 or 2 people are wounded if it prevents even more from being slaughtered.

In other news, Texas Janitors are being taught how to clean up human blood, intestinal fluid, organs, and brain matter.

This is basic math:

20 schoolchildren<Person with automatic weapon.

I still think that the best option is the "Run like fucking hell" option, but that's just me.

The standard is- Run towards a gun and away from a knife.

It would be one thing if Texas schools started having weapons lockers in the class room. As it is, they might bruise and irritate the gunner, before being mowed down by a flurry of bullets.

In other news, Texas Janitors are being taught how to clean up human blood, intestinal fluid, organs, and brain matter.

This is basic math:

20 schoolchildren<Person with automatic weapon.

You underestimate a couple of things:

How hard it is to get an automatic weapon for most people, and...

How hard it is to use an automatic weapon effectively in close quarters against rushing opponents. You've obviously not used guns much.

You underestimate a couple of things:

How hard it is to get an automatic weapon for most people, and...

How hard it is to use an automatic weapon effectively in close quarters against rushing opponents. You've obviously not used guns much.

It's pretty easy to get an automatic weapon. It takes 10 minutes to convert a semiauto M14 into a fully automatic one. Not hard.

The standard is- Run towards a gun and away from a knife.

Exactly. Close range is the only effective sphere for knives, and the least optimum for guns (Apart from shotguns maybe). Getting close is your best chance in a school shooting type of situation.

Fight!
Actually I've allways said that martial sciences should be taught at all schools. And made a manditory class.

It's pretty easy to get an automatic weapon. It takes 10 minutes to convert a semiauto M14 into a fully automatic one. Not hard.


I know that (I have a M14 myself), but how many other people do? How many school shootings are perpetrated with an auto? Not often. Even so, muzzle jump and such makes it hard to spray like you're thinking at attackers.

I know that (I have a M14 myself), but how many other people do? How many school shootings are perpetrated with an auto? Not often. Even so, muzzle jump and such makes it hard to spray like you're thinking at attackers.


Oh, by the way. You spelled your name wrong, if you're going for the Lovecraft thing. It's "Fhtagn"

Somehow, the fact that people are advocating that I should just stand still and get shot instead of resisting isn't sitting well with me.

Honestly, preventing casualties is a good thing. It doesn't matter than 1 or 2 people are wounded if it prevents even more from being slaughtered.
It's quite disgusting if you ask me.
And make no mistake. Ideology has everything to do with the opposition to this idea. Not logic, or lack thereof. A perverse, pacifist inspired logic which now infects our society.

Which really does push the idea that fighting back=evil, and pussy=good.

Oh, by the way. You spelled your name wrong, if you're going for the Lovecraft thing. It's "Fhtagn"

Y'know, I noticed that about 5 minutes after I made the account. I was desperate for a name, I guess. I have something of a creativity deficit.

this is definitely the way to go.
a few friends and i were discussing this idea last year, when we were in school. storming the attacker is so much better than cowering under tables. we realised that some may die, but better have one or two die as heroes than have a whole class wiped out without raising a finger.
That's what I think. It's the American way. Well, partly. You can get shot while tackling the gunman. The real American way is roundhouse kicking the gunman, in the face, at the speed of sound. Chuck Norris would be proud.

Most classrooms I've been in only have one door. If a nutcase with a gun comes in, people are going to die, even if they don't fight him, because there's nowhere to run.

And yes, if the students swarmed a gun-wielding attacker, some would be shot and would die. There's no real good option, but I think it's better to fight back than to just let the psycho play duck hunt.