Are you kidding me...
#16
05-02-2013, 09:39 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In a house, in a small town
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You may have checked your weapons, but what about the CCW carriers in the building and surrounding properties? How did you check those without ruining the element of surprise? Did you check the medical histories of the people you were pointing guns at?
Not going to pretend to be a security specialist, but if I were a school administrator and someone came to me with this plan, I would reject it for the following reasons:
1) Puts the health and safety of school employees at risk due to 'quite a few unknowns'. (This one is kind of a big deal. Should not even need to go further.)
2) Puts the school district at unnecessary risk for lawsuits (see #1 above), compromising the mission of the district
3) Puts the district at risk that valued employees who are essential for the mission of the district will quit, due to the fact their employer put their health and safety at risk.
Hey, I could go on all day elaborating on the 3 above, and adding 4 through 10, etc...but if you don't get it already, you are not going to, and I've got better things to do.
Not going to pretend to be a security specialist, but if I were a school administrator and someone came to me with this plan, I would reject it for the following reasons:
1) Puts the health and safety of school employees at risk due to 'quite a few unknowns'. (This one is kind of a big deal. Should not even need to go further.)
2) Puts the school district at unnecessary risk for lawsuits (see #1 above), compromising the mission of the district
3) Puts the district at risk that valued employees who are essential for the mission of the district will quit, due to the fact their employer put their health and safety at risk.
Hey, I could go on all day elaborating on the 3 above, and adding 4 through 10, etc...but if you don't get it already, you are not going to, and I've got better things to do.
Just go to Google Maps and see how rural this little town is.
Last edited by dsq3973; 05-02-2013 at 09:54 AM.
#17
05-02-2013, 02:22 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Posts: 1,506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I appreciate their concern for student safety and I'm glad they are thinking outside the box. Also, the article (while more complete than many news stories) is probably leaving out many relevant facts.
However, it was still a bad idea, whether this was a rural area, city or somewhere in between.
You don't traumatize your employees, risk their safety by putting them in a unpredictable situation, and open up your organization to lawsuits just to help prepare for a worst case (and highly unlikely) scenario. That would be bad management. Whoever approved this plan should be sent packing, IMO.
Seriously, if a small company tried a similar exercise, they would be out of business in six months or less after all the resignations and lawsuits.
No civilian wants to work for a boss that sends armed men into their place of employment, terrorizing them just to prove a point. You don't treat people that way and expect them to get over it, just because you thought it was important to scare the heck out of them. Figure out a less drastic way to teach them if they need to be taught.
However, it was still a bad idea, whether this was a rural area, city or somewhere in between.
You don't traumatize your employees, risk their safety by putting them in a unpredictable situation, and open up your organization to lawsuits just to help prepare for a worst case (and highly unlikely) scenario. That would be bad management. Whoever approved this plan should be sent packing, IMO.
Seriously, if a small company tried a similar exercise, they would be out of business in six months or less after all the resignations and lawsuits.
No civilian wants to work for a boss that sends armed men into their place of employment, terrorizing them just to prove a point. You don't treat people that way and expect them to get over it, just because you thought it was important to scare the heck out of them. Figure out a less drastic way to teach them if they need to be taught.
Last edited by dirt bike dave; 05-02-2013 at 02:34 PM.
#18
05-02-2013, 03:30 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In a house, in a small town
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I appreciate their concern for student safety and I'm glad they are thinking outside the box. Also, the article (while more complete than many news stories) is probably leaving out many relevant facts.
However, it was still a bad idea, whether this was a rural area, city or somewhere in between.
You don't traumatize your employees, risk their safety by putting them in a unpredictable situation, and open up your organization to lawsuits just to help prepare for a worst case (and highly unlikely) scenario. That would be bad management. Whoever approved this plan should be sent packing, IMO.
Seriously, if a small company tried a similar exercise, they would be out of business in six months or less after all the resignations and lawsuits.
No civilian wants to work for a boss that sends armed men into their place of employment, terrorizing them just to prove a point. You don't treat people that way and expect them to get over it, just because you thought it was important to scare the heck out of them. Figure out a less drastic way to teach them if they need to be taught.
However, it was still a bad idea, whether this was a rural area, city or somewhere in between.
You don't traumatize your employees, risk their safety by putting them in a unpredictable situation, and open up your organization to lawsuits just to help prepare for a worst case (and highly unlikely) scenario. That would be bad management. Whoever approved this plan should be sent packing, IMO.
Seriously, if a small company tried a similar exercise, they would be out of business in six months or less after all the resignations and lawsuits.
No civilian wants to work for a boss that sends armed men into their place of employment, terrorizing them just to prove a point. You don't treat people that way and expect them to get over it, just because you thought it was important to scare the heck out of them. Figure out a less drastic way to teach them if they need to be taught.
#19
05-02-2013, 08:00 PM
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Houston and College Station, TX
Posts: 6,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they let some of the faculty get trained and qualified to carry, and then allowed them to, this wouldn't be an issue. There are a lot of teachers that I wouldn't ever want touching a gun, but others would be helpful. Couple of ex-military and reserve police officers that are teachers in my area, and they'd be very beneficial to have strapped. These shootings only occur at schools because guns are absolutely banned no matter what and the shooters know that no one can stop them. Sorry, but one or two school cops to serve 2000+ students is not sufficient. Schools, and all places that disallow concealed or other firearms, make themselves targets for attacks of these kinds. You can train faculty all you want to be prepared, but unless they can confront armed gunmen with lethal force, it ain't gonna do squat.
The current no-gun policy has its points supporting it, as do other plans of action, but I see none helping. Not unless the attackers can be subdued by force, and quickly.
The current no-gun policy has its points supporting it, as do other plans of action, but I see none helping. Not unless the attackers can be subdued by force, and quickly.