Category Archives: 065 Schools

Distributed Security Responds To Texas Removing The Limit On Armed Teachers.

This report by Alex Parker at redstate.com reports on Texas’s efforts to legislate armed staff and teachers in schools. In his article he raises a couple of questions that Distributed Security’s Bill Tallen answers below:

What do you think? Are we safer with more guns in school? Or is it best to limit the number of armed staff, therefore hopefully more effectively relegating the privilege to the very most-equipped staff to handle such an immense responsibility?

Alex Parker redstate.com https://www.redstate.com/alexparker/2019/04/09/sanfa-fe-high-school-shooting-sb-244-armed-teachers-texas-school-marshals/

First, Texas both before and after the reported legislation is in no way unique.  Over half the states in the nation have provisions that allow armed staff – in some cases any legally armed citizen – on school property.  And here’s the first and perhaps the most important question: Alex asks, “What is the balance of lives saved due to the deterrent versus harm done via accidents or improper use of force?”

The historical record of armed “good guys” on school property since the passage of the federal Gun Free School Zones Act in its final form in 1996 makes this answer an easy one.

There has been one – exactly one – documented accident, which occurred in Utah early one morning (before any students were present), when an armed teacher dropped her drawers in a bathroom, and a presumably substandard handgun fell out of a clearly substandard holster, hit the floor and discharged, demolishing the toilet bowl and wounding the hapless teacher, whose leg was struck by a ceramic shard.  Context is important: Utah’s law (still in place) allows anyone with a concealed carry permit to carry on school property. The school’s administration need not be informed or aware; there are no standards or for acceptable firearms, holsters, or ammunition; and there is no training standard beyond the minimal one required to obtain a permit. Since this has not happened again in any Utah school, we might (since we have no access to confidential personnel files) infer that the teacher involved is no longer employed or received a solid education in how to carry and handle a firearm safely; and others took her inadvertent lesson to heart. It is hard to argue with Utah’s record of success with its law over the last twenty years, but a case can be made that there are better ways to provide armed security in our schools.

There has been, across the country, not a single case of improper use of force involving a legally carried firearm in a school.  Students do not take away teacher’s guns; teachers who carry do not “go off the deep end” and shoot people.  Opponents of “guns in schools” can’t stop expressing their fear of these events, but there’s no evidence to support their angst.

So there you are: on one end of the scale, only one minor accident nationwide in the last twenty years, and no improper use of force.  Against that, we weigh the interesting datum that there appears to have been no shooting – zip, zero, none – in any school in America that has had school staff – or citizens, as in Utah – legally carrying concealed weapons.  Note this does NOT include schools with “school resource officers” or other uniformed, armed security personnel, because schools “defended” by those have been attacked, with a very mixed record. At Columbine, and in Parkland, Florida, school resource officers failed to stop the shootings; in a few other cases, they have been successful. But the key thing is that when a potential attacker does not know how many people may be armed in their target location, or who they are, or where they will be at any given moment – they simply don’t come, because they cannot be confident of how long they will have to work their evil intentions before someone steps forward to stop them; they do understand that it would be within the first few minutes, long before police arrive on scene.  That is deterrence.

So the simple answer to Alex’s question is this: concealed carry by school staff appears to have deterred attack (saving lives from potential threats), while there has been essentially no down side to balance against that sterling record. 

Local control is key to the success of this approach.  State legislation must establish the legal authority for armed school staff, because they must “license” individuals to carry as an exception to the federal Gun Free School Zones Act. But once that authorization is in place in state law, local school boards – the lowest level elected officials in the nation, presumably responsive to the wishes of their community – must establish policy, and approve armed individuals in their schools.  Where a community strongly supports this approach, the school board trustees should ensure that it happens, and provide for careful vetting of volunteers, as Texas does, and establish specific requirements for initial and ongoing training and for the safety and effectiveness of firearms, ammunition, and ancillary equipment.

There is no logical reason for a legislature to limit the number of staff members who can be armed in a school; their job, and the school boards’ job, is to set a high bar of qualifications and training, and then support, encourage, and approve every individual who volunteers and meets those standards. The Texas legislature has shown that they understand this simple principle.

I have yet to meet a proponent of arming school staff who does not understand the importance of detection and intervention programs to prevent school shootings from occurring. But rather obviously, these shootings do occur, and each time they do, it’s because those programs have failed.  Innocent lives must be protected if and when that day comes.

Alex quotes one opponent of armed school staff who gets it exactly wrong. Guns in the hands of carefully screened volunteers, who train to a rigorous standard, are precisely that last line of defense, and will deter armed attack or – if deterrence fails – defend innocent lives.  “Adding guns to the problem” in the hands of dedicated, well-trained persons is most definitely the solution.

Bill Tallen is Executive Vice President – Tactical Operations for Distributed Security. Prior to joining the enterprise he had a 20 year career with the Department of Energy, where he served as a Federal Agent, team leader, unit commander, training instructor, and manager in the agency which provides secure transportation of nuclear weapons and nuclear materials within CONUS. He helped to found DOE’s Special Response Force program, developing and teaching urban and close quarter battle techniques to Federal Agents charged with recovery of lost assets. He has designed and conducted a variety of wargaming efforts in support of vulnerability assessments, security system design, and leadership training, and has taught a variety of crisis decision making models. Bill holds the degree of Master of Arts in National Security and Strategic Studies from the U.S. Naval War College. 

Teens Beat Armed Guard Outside of Restaurant on Chicago’s Gold Coast…

“Video emerged today of an armed man pulling his weapon to ward off two apparent attackers near the Magnificent Mile, just two days after widespread mob action prompted police to arrest 21 people in the area. The video, filmed from inside McDonald’s at 10 East Chicago, shows two males attacking a middle-aged man who appears to be a security guard. The man is slammed against the restaurant’s outside wall by the pair who punch and grapple the older man as he works to free himself.”

Buy a gun. Get trained.

Tactical firearms training course, April 26-29, Tier 3 Course at Archbold, Ohio

Click here to register: https://distributedsecurity.com/offerings/training-calendar.html

DETAILS

The Tier 3 – INDIVIDUAL TACTICS Program is designed for individuals who want to master armed self-defense in home and street scenarios. The on-range course reviews, refreshes and hones handgun skills taught in our modular Combative Handgun Program, and develops decision making and tactical skills with 12 escalating Reality Based Training (RBT) scenarios using non-lethal training firearms and live role players. Online training resources introduce a wide range of tactics, techniques, and concepts to streamline and accelerate the on-range training.

WHAT IS RBT? RBT is a type of simulation or “force-on-force” training that provides stress inoculation – allowing the student to experience what violence looks and feels like during a lethal force confrontation. Because of the immersive nature of the training, the brain and body can absorb and process the experience as if it were actually occurring to nearly the same degree as if it were an actual situation. RBT boosts the student’s confidence in his ability to dominate adversaries under the normally debilitating stress of a lethal force encounter. This type of experiential training builds the fund of applicable experience that will speed effective decision making and effective performance in a crisis.

STUDENTS LEARN how distance and reaction time force decision making in a lethal force confrontation. They learn how to test for compliance and de-escalate a situation by clear, forceful verbal commands. They learn how to quickly assess and react to a wide variety of threats, and apply their decision making, gun handling, and tactical skills in realistic scenarios, under conditions that include low light, multiple adversaries, stress, limited time, and uncertainty. They learn how to communicate effectively with 9-1-1 operators and responding law enforcement officers.

This course is suited for graduates of our Combative Handgun Program (or, with our review and approval, similar quality training obtained elsewhere), who want to hone and refresh their gun handling skills while applying them in the challenging RBT environment. We include basic tactics and techniques for two people working together, making this Program especially well-suited for couples who want to learn how to defend their home, working both individually and as a team.

Our training methodology is delivered in three phases: pre-course information and guidance, range training, and our post-course support system.

  1. Pre-course: When you register for this Program, you will receive detailed instructions and access to curricula, instructional videos and photos, drills, manuals, scenarios, and other resources in our online Defense Academy so that you can, on your own schedule, become comfortable with key concepts and techniques before you attend your on-range Tier 3 course. You will have access to qualified instructors who can answer your questions and address your concerns before you ever set foot on the range.
  2. Your completion of the pre-course work allows us to minimize “classroom” or lecture time during the range training event. While awaiting your turn to rotate through each RBT scenario, you will practice and polish your gun handling skills with our expert instructors on the live fire range. In RBT, you will apply those gun handling skills along with effective tactics and solid decision making to solve realistic, stressful, and increasingly difficult problems that pit you against well-trained and carefully scripted role players in a safe training environment.
  3. Post-course: You will gain access to additional resources in the Defense Academy to help you review and sustain the skills and knowledge you have developed in your Tier 3 course. Our training staff will remain accessible to answer any questions and recommend further training opportunities. 
    Program Information

COST: $1,695
DATES: April 26-28 2019 See Calendar
TIME: 3 Days on-range
LOCATION: Archbold, Ohio
PREREQUISITE: Completion of DSI’s Combative Handgun Program. Comparable training obtained elsewhere may be an acceptable substitute, at the discretion of DSI’s Chief Instructor.

Kirsten Gillibrand will call Trump a ‘coward’ in New York speech while hailing as ‘brave’ high school students organizing to end gun violence.

I would agree with Mrs. Gillibrand’s characterization of ‘brave’ if the young men she’s referring to were lobbying for the training and weapons necessary to defend their classmates* from violent attack. Instead her ‘brave’ are a bunch of whiny entitled pajama boys hiding behind their mommy’s skirt.

*Yes. I am continuing to suggest that responsible young men and women in high school be given the training, weapons and supervision necessary to help defend their classmates from violent attack. This is no different than fielding a varsity level football team. 

Source: Kirsten Gillibrand will call Trump a ‘coward’ in New York speech

Jacinda Ardern’s Gun Confiscation Scheme Is A Hysterical Reaction To The Mosque Shooting That Will Weaken New Zealand.

As I watched New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern’s first press conference after the mosque shooting, I was struck by how naive her comments were. She seemed to think that her country existed in a utopian world exempt from terrorism. Now, further demonstrating her naivete, she is proceeding with a hysterical, half-baked plan to confiscate the weapons her citizens need to defend against future attacks.

These are the facts for New Zealand. It will happen again. Law enforcement will not be there when it happens again, and via her gun confiscation scheme, she has eliminated the most effective measure her citizens have for defending themselves.

Exit question. Why is Jacinda taking weapons from lawful New Zealanders? The crime was committed by an Australian who purchased his weapons legally and held all of the proper permits.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/new-zealand-prime-minister-says-semi-automatic-weapons-will-be-banned-after-mass-shooting/

UA-56674165-2