Tuesday, 13 November 2012
-
Students Taught to Fight Against School Shooter
A.L.i.C.E. - Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, EvacuateThis is the name of the program that is gaining momentum and maybe even heading to a school near you. ALICE training, founded by a former SWAT officer, has already been implemented in 300 schools. It is meant to teach kids how to fight back against a gunman.
The most controversial aspect of this training is "C" - Counter. This step, normally only taught to the older students (as well as teachers), involves, as a last resort, physical distraction, diversion, and attempts to overwhelm a shooter using numbers alone. Students are instructed to keep moving, make noise, and throw things. They are taught to never simply duck and cover during a shooting.
The usual lockdown method is not effective or smart in my opinion. The doors are locked, the lights are turned off, and the children are herded into a corner of the room. In the words of my military husband, "it creates a death trap." No one likes the idea of children having to overwhelm a shooter - but if the only other option is that they sit like ducks waiting for their execution? Neither option is good. Neither option is something we want to think about. But I would rather that my kids - and yours - had a fighting chance. The program has already been credited with saving lives in an Ohio high school cafeteria shooting earlier this year. It is not without controversy, however, as some critics state, "as soon as a student is shot obeying ALICE standards, parents are going to ask who taught them to do that?"
What do you think of the ALICE program? Have you heard of it? Do you have any experience with it?
Related Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to momaroo's Momaroo Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in momaroo's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: sarahsmurfette@xanga
- About Me: Proud military wife. Mother of two.
-
True
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 0 68 Views: 0 750610 Comments: 0 1610 View all posts by sarahsmurfette@xanga
Comments (15)
Honestly I think it's a good idea to learn. No one should be required to actuallyy fight back because everyone reacts differently in a crisis but I would rather have a little defence knoledge as apposed to none.
btw when ever there is a tragedy some one will always aimlessly blame. No matter what really happened. People allow their hurt, fear, and anger lead their thoughts most.
I don't know how I feel about ALICE right now but I always thought the lockdown thing wasn't ver effective. You are sitting, locked in a room, waiting for the shooter or "dangerous" person to come knocking. Whether you open the door for them or not, they will find their way in if they want to.
If it saves lives, good. But I think it depends on what sort of weapon the shooter has. If they have semiautomatics like the killers at Columbine had, would it really be effective for students to try to fight back?
And while I fully support preparing students to know how to react in an emergency, wouldn't preparing them for school shootings have some drawbacks? Most of the school shootings I've heard about have been carried out by students who were attending the school at that time. If they're giving instructions for how to react to a shooter, then chances are, the would be shooter is also sitting in that group hearing the same instructions, and then can anticipate what people might try and think of ways to counteract it.
@EccentricSiren@xanga - That's a valid point that the potential shooter may have attended the same defensive/offensive training. My thing is, though, isn't it better to have a fighting chance than no chance at all?
So, what is the intent of the "C" counter? Are the students wanting to "take the shooter down" somehow? Drive them out of the room? Distract them long enough (stall them) for adults to come take over? I think that is the more important question that adults would want answered. I want to know!
I'd rather my kid be armed, honestly. *shrug* Realistically, the standard procedure seems like it would be reasonable if the teacher (or someone in the room) had a gun and proper training. Or even waited by the door w/ a baseball bat.
The lockdown process, in my opinion, isn't very effective. I think it's better the children at least have a fighting chance rather than just being sitting ducks. However, I don't know how effective the "C" in ALICE would be either.... I dunno....
If someone has a gun and you do not, the best self-defense is to run. I am not arguing with the fact that sometimes it is necessary to fight back, but the counter part really needs to be on the lowest priority.
Perhaps the guy did not have the steps listed in order of importance because he could not think of a clever acronym otherwise?
I haven't heard of this until now but I would rather my daughter have the training than to sit around and just wait to get shot. She is about to turn 8 and this year I am going to teach her to shoot a pistol. I am also going to teach her what to do if someone breaks in to our home and for some reason I am unable to protect her.
It's about time we started teaching our kids to fight back, again.. When my grandma was a teacher, her students brought their rifles to class with them. When this country was settled, many kids did their share of shooting when faced with bandits or Indians.
Hmm seems more effective than the standard method of locking yourself in a classroom. I remember hearing about this years ago (not this program), but a bunch of kids decided to fight back and they swarmed him and got the gun. Hopefully the shock of everyone coming at the gunman is enough time for the students to attack.
The lockdown is not effective, you are right. The critics who cite possible liability problems are also right, but you know what? If you've got a school shooter, nothing is going right at that moment anyway.
I think that adults who are licensed to carry a weapon should be allowed to carry them on school grounds. I'm not talking about systematically arming the teachers- just letting the people who are licensed to carry elsewhere, also carry at school if they choose to.I think it makes sense. The amount of time it took for freaking SWAT to react to the Columbine shooting was shameful...we've come a long way since then. It's good to teach the students that they do have a chance of changing the outcome of a shooting, and that you can't always wait for the authorities to rescue you. Also, "lockdown" is part of the acronym so it's not like they're telling the students to act chaotic the moment a threat is perceived. Either way, though, if a child is shot, the safety methods that were used are going to be attacked because a mourning parent will naturally try to find answers/blame from any angle they can...it's understandable
I could see it going either way, either the shooter gets overwhelmed and freaked out and disaster is averted, or the shooter gets mad and kills way more people than they originally would have.
@raspberryjade@xanga - That's what I thought. If she's got books and stuff being thrown at her I think she'd shoot away, hoping to kill the kids that are doing the "distraction".