plan for an armed intruder/hostage situation

[The Last Standing Knight]

I always love seeing the official police line when someone fights back against an armed robber and they say you are better off giving in. I got my pistol permit in 1995 because I was working overnights at a convenient store and every cop I knew would tell me to get one because by the time they got there it would be all over. Amazing that two weeks after I left the place was robbed.

I once worked for a large industrial mill and there worry was someone walking into the front office and either shooting up the place or taking the company President hostage. None of us were armed even though the head of security, the assistant head, and the head of operations were all ex cops. The President of the company's brilliant plan was that if someone went up front with a gun to send one of us with a camera to videotape what was transpiring. (Not kidding that was the plan). My boss refused to do it because the fact that our uniforms were strikingly similar to the local PD and we might catch a bullet and certainly would be in the way of the local cops and would put someone at risk. The response of having the head of security carrying a pistol concealed of the head of operations carrying concealed was laughed at because they thought too many bad things could happen.

I have worked doing higher end security for many places before and since getting into law enforcement and what I will tell you is that no company, school whatever likes to spend the money on security and when the budget gets tight it is the first thing to go because it is looked as being not necessary. We had a local school after Columbine get a security person, made sure entry was being made by the right people, but after the first school budget, that person was let go. There was a local department officer sent to a school as a resource officer, once money got tight they were let go. I worked part time for a company that made medical supplies which utilized a lot of gold and silver being on hand. We would find the safe which housed all the precious metals in it left open all the time, employees hanging out, kids trespassing etc. When I first started there everyone working there were ex or current cops and all was well. Then the budget got cut and the company got cheap and when I left I was the last person who had any real experience. Low and behold problems started including thefts, even by some of the security help who were little more than minimum wage slaves. Eventually they canned them all and the last I heard stuff is disappearing all the time now and the company can't figure out why.
When I worked at a psych hospital which was pretty upscale and most patients were there because they are private pay I found out exactly what happens when money trumps security interests. We had escapes all the time but because of the strict rules after they reached a certain point we were under orders not to follow. One guy got fired simply because a girl was trying to climb a fence and she was going to fall so he reached out and tried to catch her. (this place had children and relatives of state senators and the like) He put a black and blue mark on her arm where he caught her and even though there were witnesses they still tossed him. I left because because I was responsible for the security of the whole hospital while I was working and to save money they added on more jobs like having us collect the garbage from the whole place, all the while being told if an emergency comes up to respond ASAP.
The problem is that most places look at and hire security simply because it lowers their insurance and they fail to look at it from an actual point of stopping anything. Look at your mall cops and places like amusement parks and fairs. One job I had was working armed work collecting money with another employee at an amusement park. It was nothing to collect $30000 or more every night. The company didn't like the complaints it was getting from the public seeing armed guards (I wore a Model 19 and another guy who was a retired LEO who carried a Model 15). Eventually they got rid of us and went to unarmed guards but still people collecting all that money. We were paid well but the new guys were making $6.25 an hour in 1998. Thank God nothing ever happened.
Schools are making a big show of beefing up security right now and towns by having security, cops in every school whatever, but when it comes time to pass the new budgets and the towns and boards see what all that overtime is costing they will drop it, because nothing bad happened there. I don't know what the answer is, banning guns is the first kneejerk reaction as usual and they may get their wish the way some of the NRA backed politicians are already caving. In the end something else will happen and they will demand another law and so on and so forth. Should teachers be armed, I don't know I have seen some of the teachers out there and don't see it. More liberal places like NYC, California and Chicago won't allow that. I think though that people need to get their heads out of their backsides and take security more seriously. They have made the schools this way be their liberal policies and now they need to figure out how to fix them.

As someone who works in the private security field, in regards to this I can honestly say AMEN! However, most of the clients I deal with over the years hired security guards not only for insurance purposes, but for somebody to assume responsibility, risk, and liability for them. In other words, someone to throw under the bus at every opprotunity.

 

[Stonecove]

Great input guys. I agree GaryS making the assumption that it is a hostage situation is the first mistake. They need a plan for an armed intruder that assumes he is there to kill everyone. You all gave me good ideas, but I am no expert so how do I get across to the leaders there that a new plan needs to be developed. Who in the community is available to call upon to provide expert advise. Do you just call Homeland Security or the FBI, Where to start? How do you fight those that say not to defend yourself or take an aggressive strategy. I'm sure that there are those that want a passive policy. How does one defeat that type of madness. Perhaps there needs to be a community wide policy developed for all schools and institutions. Anyone have experience with this type of thing?
Again thanks for your input.
Stonecove

 

[jkc]

Well, all this macho chest-thumping about arming teachers and so forth is just silly --- slice a cross-section of National Educational Association members, and you'll find teachers and administrators willing to train to and use firearms as scarce as fat on filet mignon. Apologies to the few exceptions who are forum members, if it need be said, but as a class, public school teachers, college professors, administrators, etc., are mostly dyed-in-the-wool "hoplophobes", (Col. Cooper's coined term for irrational gun-haters), and are maybe one click above Buddhist monks in their aversion to using self-defensive or protective force, and are card-carrying sheep, for the most part. These are not the people we ought to look to, to defend schoolkids, or even themselves.

 

[GaryS]

Well, all this macho chest-thumping about arming teachers and so forth is just silly --

Probably a lot more than you think. The NEA does not speak for a majority of teachers. In fact, many that I know wouldn't be members if they had a choice.

 

[GaryS]

I wish I had a good answer for you. I have no faith in the FBI or any other law enforcement agency (outside of St. Louis County) to advise you to fight back. They'll all tout the standard line about "lock downs" calling 9-1-1, hiding, not resisting, and the rest of the failed techniques.

Some people have suggested putting police officers in every school in the country. That's financially impractical. Some towns would have devote all of their day shift personnel just to the schools. Or they'd have to pay officers overtime. Or they'd have to hire more officers.

The state of the economy just doesn't allow that. And funds for school security programs have been cut under the current President, so look for lip service from the federal government.

Great input guys. I agree GaryS making the assumption that it is a hostage situation is the first mistake. They need a plan for an armed intruder that assumes he is there to kill everyone. You all gave me good ideas, but I am no expert so how do I get across to the leaders there that a new plan needs to be developed. Who in the community is available to call upon to provide expert advise. Do you just call Homeland Security or the FBI, Where to start? How do you fight those that say not to defend yourself or take an aggressive strategy. I'm sure that there are those that want a passive policy. How does one defeat that type of madness. Perhaps there needs to be a community wide policy developed for all schools and institutions. Anyone have experience with this type of thing?
Again thanks for your input.
Stonecove

 

[jkc]

Probably a lot more than you think. The NEA does not speak for a majority of teachers. In fact, many that I know wouldn't be members if they had a choice.

And so, my preemptive apology to you, and others here, who are, I'm confident, the exception to the rule. Nonetheless, as George Orwell said, "We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm." I'm unwilling to entrust my own sister, an elementary school teacher, who is pretty much a sheep, to take responsibility for bodyguarding schoolchildren. We need well trained, "rough men", not schoolmarms and bureaucrats, to intercede and kill assailants of schoolchildren.

 

[Poodle Soup]

Prevention would be best, teaching faculty members ways to delay some wackjob would be the next step. Ever been in an enclosed area with a discharged fire extinguisher? You cant breath, fog them with it. Door jambs and get the kids out the windows and running away from the guy with the gun. School have an archery unit? Well arrows were dropping bad guys long before guns were. Scissors? They look like 2 knives pinned together to me.

Bad thing is, time is on the bad guys side.

 

[Kanewpadle]

As a professional locksmith I've done quit a bit of work at local schools both public and private.

Most schools are wide open. You can walk right in the front door unopposed. Some require you to be "buzzed" in.

These schools have the best hardware. The best doors. Safety glass and closers.

IMO, if schools were in a state of constant lock down requiring any and all visitors to use the front door and be "buzzed" in, we would not have these shootings.

It would take considerable effort to shoot your way in. And once inside it would take more effort to gain access to classrooms and office areas if the doors were locked. In accordance with fire and building codes all doors must open outwards for emergency egress. So a door that does not swing inward cannot be forced in. Shoot the lock off the door? Unlikely even with a rifle. That's why cops use a shotgun with slugs.

Special locks and door releases are available specifically for these situations but are expensive. Every lock in the school can be locked and every door can be closed with a push of a button. But school budgets make this an unlikely expense.

The bottom line is once the bad guy is in, it doesn't matter what we do. Whether you hide or fight, somebody is going to get hurt. But if you can slow the bad guy down significantly, maybe the cops can get there before someone gets hurt.

It's no different than keeping the bad guy out of your home. If he gets in and you don't have time to act, you're at his mercy. If he has any.

 

[Kanewpadle]

Come on guys. Don't get this thread locked too. Some of us would like to discuss this more.

 

[kisportolt]

Most schools are wide open. You can walk right in the front door unopposed. Some require you to be "buzzed" in.

Sandy Hook had recently installed a state-of-the-art security system where everyone needed to be buzzed in. So he went through a window... No security system is perfect, just like no answer to this thread is going to be.

Recently Michigan legistlation passed the "right to work" bill and there was a large amount of upheaval. Because of that, my employer released a statement with precautionary plans for different scenarios (bombs, shooters, etc) and most of it was "watch for thigns that seem odd, go with your gut, get out of there and call 911". We are not allowed to be armed at work, but are very much a part of the public and have angry visitors at times. Taking schools out of the debate, what do other work places do to prep for these situations?

 

[GaryS]

If you look on CNN.com, you'll see that it took the police 20 minutes after the first calls for police and other first responders to arrive. As we now know, a lot happened in those 20 minutes, none of it good.

 

[Old TexMex]

Why are security systems less effective in public schools than in banks? Because the education system culture is in denial, and we have perhaps entered a new stage of danger. (As a kid, my family never locked our house, nor did any of our neighbors).
Schools are behind the curve, but it isn't too late to correct. My job includes the protection of several adults and children in foreign countries and right here in the U.S.
Their private schools have armed guards, not because they care more for their children, but rather because the reality of threat has been visited upon them and they have accepted the reality, uncomfortable as it is to think about. This not rocket surgery, it's an admission of unmanageability, and a decision to correct the problem by using proven methods.

 

[Comrad]

I would say forget hiding and run in addition, you can't comply with a gunman, if you do he will take you to the place where HE wants to shoot you because for what ever reason he doesn't want to shoot you where you stand.
Maybe we need airplane cockpit style doors on our classrooms.
Or forget it all and find a way to get the mentally ill off the streets, that's the real problem.

 

[feralmerril]

I havent visited any school in over 50 years. However I suppose they are every level of size and expense.
Overall the cheapest thing that would work is train teachers and arm them. I suppose something like 5 to 10 percent might go for that idea. The most expensive thing to do would be to put LE in every school. There are many small communitys can hardly pay a liveing wage for what they have. I like the grandfather system the best. Yesterday I typed what I thought the best or at least, a good idea here. It lasted less than 3 minuets before it dissapeared. I will clean it up politicaly and try again.
Maybe sombody here doesnt think I know what I am talking about. Maybe I dont, as I am a slow learner. However I do have almost as much security experiance as I am old (71 1/2) if you go by 40 hours a week.
Why not ask the POTUS for some of that stymulus money he wants to give away to set up a training program for the grandfather idea? That would be the cheapest thing to do. If he wants to improve on that idea himself he could easly actualy pay and employ maybe another 1/2 million new jobs to boost the economy.

 

[MaximumLawman]

Well, all this macho chest-thumping about arming teachers and so forth is just silly --- slice a cross-section of National Educational Association members, and you'll find teachers and administrators willing to train to and use firearms as scarce as fat on filet mignon.

That makes about as much sense as saying cops aren't in favor of CCW because the National Association of Chiefs of Police says so.

 

[MXP]

I am from a contry where it is not allowed to carry a gun or use a gun for home defense. I can only use a gun on a range (from .22 up to .357 for handguns). It takes from 3 weeks to 3 months to get a permission for a handgun. I can have the guns and ammunition at home locked in a safe. I should have very good reason to use a handgun against an intruder. I have to prove that this was the only way I would not be killed by the intruder......more or less. That is how it is here. Because an intruder knows that he is relative safe it is rare that it ends up violent. Normally they just want money and they do not want to kill people. It is very rare a person just want to kill.

But.....how often have you needed your "carry gun" for self defense? .....the importance of carry a gun for self defense.....it may be "overrated" compared to other risks here in life?

If you use a gun for self defense.....and maybe kill a person.....how good reasons should you have? .....I guess such a case will end up in the court? .....for an intruder in your house....is that a good reason.....even if he is unarmed? ....are there any rules for how to use the gun....e.g. first step point the gun a the person....and tell him to leave....and if not....a warning shot......and if not...then a hit-shot?

If you draw a gun...in a public area...without fire it......will such a case normally end up i court? ....and it will be evaluated if this was ok to draw the gun?

 

[TexasArmed]

I am from a contry where it is not allowed to carry a gun or use a gun for home defense. I can only use a gun on a range (from .22 up to .357 for handguns). It takes from 3 weeks to 3 months to get a permission for a handgun. I can have the guns and ammunition at home locked in a safe. I should have very good reason to use a handgun against an intruder. I have to prove that this was the only way I would not be killed by the intruder......more or less. That is how it is here. Because an intruder knows that he is relative safe it is rare that it ends up violent. Normally they just want money and they do not want to kill people. It is very rare a person just want to kill.

But.....how often have you needed your "carry gun" for self defense? .....the importance of carry a gun for self defense.....it may be "overrated" compared to other risks here in life?

If you use a gun for self defense.....and maybe kill a person.....how good reasons should you have? .....I guess such a case will end up in the court? .....for an intruder in your house....is that a good reason.....even if he is unarmed? ....are there any rules for how to use the gun....e.g. first step point the gun a the person....and tell him to leave....and if not....a warning shot......and if not...then a hit-shot?

If you draw a gun...in a public area...without fire it......will such a case normally end up i court? ....and it will be evaluated if this was ok to draw the gun?

Your questions are difficult to give clear cut answers to because each State in the USA has its own laws. Some states don't allow Concealed Carry, most states recognize permits from a number of other States. Some states have a duty to retreat, some do not. Some have castle doctrines, some do not. Some are open carry states, some are not.

In most states one cannot use deadly force to protect property, but Texas is an exception. Any time someone uses a handgun in defense, legal proceedings could happen.

That being said, in Texas if someone is breaking in a door to get into a persons home whether he is armed or not the homeowner may use deadly force to stop the intruder. But after he is shot, one does not have the right to continue shooting once the threat is stopped.

In some states one might be compelled to retreat to the far corner of their house to retreat from the intruder, and are duty to retreat states. That used to be the law in Tennessee.

As far as how often does one really need his concealed weapon, if you carry it for 20 years and it saves your life one,
I would reckon it would be worth it. As for most criminals
not wanting to do anything except take money, if there
is an intruder breaking in, you don't have a good way to determine what his intentions are. So for me, if the deadbolt strong door is being knocked down, I would stop the intruder at the door coming in. I have never been to your country,
Denmark, but I have been to Norway many years ago.

 

[Kanewpadle]

Sandy Hook had recently installed a state-of-the-art security system where everyone needed to be buzzed in. So he went through a window... No security system is perfect, just like no answer to this thread is going to be.

Recently Michigan legistlation passed the "right to work" bill and there was a large amount of upheaval. Because of that, my employer released a statement with precautionary plans for different scenarios (bombs, shooters, etc) and most of it was "watch for thigns that seem odd, go with your gut, get out of there and call 911". We are not allowed to be armed at work, but are very much a part of the public and have angry visitors at times. Taking schools out of the debate, what do other work places do to prep for these situations?

Most businesses are not well prepared either. Access control (keyless entry) is very expensive. So quite often only major corporations can afford it.

I've done work at banks, pharmaceutical companies, police departments, schools etc.....
If done right you can't even get in the front door. And once in the front door, quite often there is another door that is locked. And most of the time there are cameras recording everything.

I am not sure how the shooter gained access at Sandy Hook but one radio report said that he was let in the door by the Principal. Whether he did walk in the front door or crawl through a window, safety procedures were not followed.

Obama was right. We are not taking care of our children. But gun control is not the answer. I would gladly give $5 more per new gun purchase towards increasing the security of our schools.

 

[Lost Lake]

I think the key is that any security measure can can be beaten. Doors with locks, cameras, buzzed-in only systems, they can all be beat. Easily.

So we use them as a partial preventive measure. Just because you have locked doors doesn't mean you can let your guard down.

If an intruder gets in you need to have a plan. Hiding is a good plan until you are found. If an intruder gets past the front door and into a room, you better have a plan B.

I am pushing for a response cabinet, like a fire extinguisher cabinet, accessible to trained personnel, that contains the tools that they can use to save lives. Perhaps a taser, tear gas, smoke bombs, hand cuffs, a gun, rifle, maybe a shotgun that shoots bean bags if you want a less lethal choice.

If you had such a cache of tools, there is chance that someone in the school would be able to use them. If only one life were saved the response cabinet would be extremely valuable.

What would have happened if someone threw a couple of high density smoke bombs in the room that school shooter were in? So thick he couldn't see? He would have run out, and into what? Perhaps an armed Principal or an ex-cop custodian.

What I'm saying is at least make the tools for defense available so the poor victims have a fighting chance....

 

[miles71]

Just having some sort of training on how to handle this situation would be a big step in the right direction. In my county we have never been informed or trained on how to handle a hostile intruder. As a department we have come up with a plan, but nothing building wide.

This is a gun forum so we all are shooters, but I am sure we can also agree being prepared and using our minds is more effective than any tool like a gun.

TD