RKBA Elite -- Hard Targets

Last update: 07/09/2001
Email: JoeH@turbonet.com
Index of pages.

[JKH: My initial thoughts.]

Something I wanted to do with my kids schools shortly after the Columbine shooting was to go over their plans for such an event and suggest some things.

I had in mind teaching some firearms disarming and pepper spray techniques. Imagine if they could flood the halls with pepper spray within a minute or so based on a code word known only to the adults in the school? You can get 'fire extinguisher size' pepper spray containers. If each of the adults had one near their desk and they just hosed down the area(s) where the shooter(s) were located it would prevent the sort of thing where the shooters were moving around and shooting people cowering under desks. It should pretty much immobilize the shooter(s) to one location. The downside would be that emergency crews would be handicapped some too. Also, if some people where breathing impaired prior to the pepper spray (disease or after being shot) it would complicate things. But perhaps it would be better than letting the shooter(s) have unobstructed run of the place.

Basically, I working towards going to SAF, the NRA or someone and help them package a RKBA friendly school shooting response plan that can be implemented in the schools. Volunteers, such as us -- particularly those with some teaching experience, could go to the schools under the banner of SAF or the NRA and say, we know about guns, let us help you plan and train against them.

I don't know, Joe. Teaching an amateur firearm disarms might make things worse. You aren't talking about a group of people that would actually practice the techniques required. I haven't been taught them myself, and I would never try unless I had already decided I was toast anyway.

Pepper spray is interesting, but it sounds to big, expensive, and dangerous considering the likelihood something will happen at a particular school.

Arming a few teachers seems a better idea, IMHO.

[JKH: I think arming some teachers is exactly the right thing to do. But we can't get there from here. It's illegal in most states. But this is a step in the right direction. I think that just by going through some practice situations with squirt guns they will soon realize they are best off if they have squirt guns too. My 'wet dream' is that the faculty start demanding that the 'gun-free' zones around schools be lifted for them so they can have the best chance to defend themselves and the students.

I've taken a firearms retention and disarming class. I've taken two pepper spray classes.  If we were just teaching the disarming portion and pepper spray stuff and just the portions of that applicable to the situations that might be encountered, I think the entire class could be done in a day. And I think it could be done such that it would make things much better instead of worse. There are some very simple and very effective things that can be done. InSights (http://www.insightstraining.com) has developed a disarming system that doesn't require but the slightest amount of branching in the response. Virtually nothing to remember and practice. I think it would work. It certainly is better than cowering under a desk and waiting your turn.

The expense for the pepper spray containers I'm thinking of is about $35.00 -- in quantity one.  I'm sure it is cheaper in large quantities.]

I like it. It's an "area" variation of the concealed carry principle - hardening the target. I can see lots of objections (most bogus, but some real, like the breathing handicapped - asthma, etc), but I think it's worth exploring. It might help get people into an accurate defensive mindset.... It is also proactive on our part.....a step in the right direction.....

Objections we'd have to deal with could include:

• Breathing impaired children (asthma, etc) (and your preference is...getting shot?)
• How to prevent a child from inadvertently/maliciously setting it off
• How to keep it from being used against you by the bad guys
• How to deal with mechanical malfunction (it goes off when it shouldn't due to mechanical failure) (probably more likely than actual use under stress)
• Cost to purchase/install
• Staff training (time/cost)
• Also, under training, getting some "pacifist" teachers into an aggressively defensive mindset
• Cleanup cost when it goes off (the stuff is really nasty to clean up)
• Even if it does go in, how do you ensure that people will actually use it as they should? (variation on "it can't happen here")
• How to get the innocent kids out if the halls are contaminated?
• How to "authorize" appropriate use? some kind of announcement?
• Would there be physical strength limits? Could small, weak teachers use it effectively?

If each *classroom* had such a bottle:

• It would keep it out of the halls (reduce the exposure to vandalism, more in teacher control)
• The tactics could be to just hose down the hall near your own class, shutting us in and them out

[JKH:  This is exactly what I had in mind. Notice would come over the intercom -- something like: "Hot Tamales! Second floor - West wing Hot Tamales!" ]

Of course, the simplest, most cost effective way would be to *allow* (not require) licensed concealed carry by teachers, school administrators, parents, and other legitimate visitors.....just put some doubt in the bad guy's mind...

[JKH: Of course.  Be we can't get there from here.  We need to create the proper mindset in the teachers and administration first.  They need to be able to turn into predators rather than as prey/victims.]

The sign says "Certified Gun-Free Zone!" The bad guys reads "Certified Defenseless Victim Zone."

Just my first thoughts ... no good answers ...

• They have a codeword system at "Eagle Hardware" it seems. I saw a sign in a stairway that indicated something to that effect. They broadcast a page for a particular "person or dept" to 'discretely' alert all employees to certain conditions.
•  I have seen/heard the headlines after they had to clear a whole public mall area for cleanup after one person discharged a personal sized pepper spray. Use in enclosed areas sounds risky. [JKH: Cleaning up blood and bodies is preferable?]
• Any such large spray can would need to be individually padlocked or secured, or it itself would be an invitation as a source of destruction. Having gotten into the school with a gun, that would have made a great first target. If you knew it was there you'd take a gas mask. One shot and the whole room would have been incapacitated. Pick off a handy target or two and move to the next place you 'plotted' with the highest trapped persons per pepper spray ratio.  [JKH: Yes of course.  Security plans of any type can be defeated if they are known and you have enough resources.]
• As you note there would be many concerns with compromising the health of marginal 'breathers'. Releasing that quantity of such a substance would indeed hinder the operation of emergency services - and no evacuation or movement of "peaceable" air breathers would be possible. Some would be as likely to be trapped in harms way as out.
• In the Columbine case the school had been rigged with explosives - pinning people in certain spaces could have been fatal.
• Of course the police response there wouldn't have helped that either since everyone seemed paralyzed in place due to a lack of accurate info. The way they herded off the 'escapees' - if there had been an aware person or persons that made a decisive break from the confines, they probably would have been shot.
• If those two idiots had been 'challenged' with lack of mobility or a perceived threat they may not have gone suicidal, but ballistic. An altered mindset could have actually worked to have set some of the 60(?) bombs off.
• There needs to be a good plan and awareness in place. But that needs accurate information and training to be effective for any offensive use.
• Even the police had no means of accessing the situation and responding appropriately.
• Having a disarmed and indefensible location doesn't seem like it lends itself to a stable base of operations. I can't even picture most schools offering uniform hiding places to secure the innocent. Are the 'adults' always aware and in the rooms and in control?
• Anything less than a credible and effective (lethal) threat seems like it would offer more of a liability than an 'insurance' policy.

[JKH: Have you taken a pepper spray class?  The long term (> 1 hour) effects are zero.  The only possible long term risk is if someone has breathing problems prior to getting the pepper spray.  And I don't understand about someone going 'ballistic' with pepper spray.  The prep is physically fully functional and is shooting people.  Pepper spray will provide some level of incapacitation via vision, pain, and coughing.  This will decrease his functional ability.  Which is better?  A fully functional nut with a gun?  Or partially or fully incapacitated nut with a gun?]

Your pepper spray idea sounds a bit extreme. Really I like the idea but I just think it would be a hard sell. If one of the innocents got doused with the stuff there would be lawyers crawling all over the place. As far as schools accepting a NRA sanctioned course, that to would probably go over like a lead balloon. The NRA has been trying to get public school acceptance for their Eddy Eagle program for some time without a lot of success. Not that I'm real familiar with it, but it sounds like a good program. Why don't we try and push it? And some information on what to do in emergency situations could be included as part of that program.

[JKH: Eddy Eagle is completely different.  It's aimed at grade school age kids.  What I'm thinking about is for adults at Junior/High schools.  The NRA would take five to ten years to get such a class into place after being reviewed by 17 committees and ten times by the board of directors.  This is in addition to the 'evil NRA' image the public has of them.  Although I mentioned the NRA and I would mention it to them just to get them moving on their own version for immediate deployment I'm thinking more of SAF and JPFO which public education organizations without the image problems of the NRA.]

It is an interesting, but politically completely unworkable idea. They'd never let such a thing as you advocate be taught.

[JKH: I have one teacher in a small school in North Idaho that has asked to be taught the disarming part along with another teacher.  She is one of my firearms students.  Her sister has taken a pepper spray class and gives glowing reviews of it when she tells other people about it.  They both think the pepper spray idea is good.  I'm virtually certain she has enough pull to get it a full plan implemented.  Once we get one school trained, and we do a good job, we can use them as references for other schools.  I think you are wrong.  I think we can do it.  And only if we don't try will the idea fail for certain.]

My feeling is that flooding the halls with pepper spray isn't the answer. Too much of a chance to do major harm to innocents in the hallway. No reason to take such risks. I'd be much more in favor of unarmed and armed self-defense classes for the teachers. Make them mandatory, all teachers must take either unarmed or armed self-defense classes, or both, at their option. They must retake the course or a refresher every year, maybe even twice per year. Do away with the gun-free school zone laws, or at least exempt teachers who've taken the armed self-defense courses. Publicize the hell out of the program, but don't release which teachers have taken which classes.

[JKH: What sort of risks are you concerned about?   The mandatory armed/unarmed instruction is a great idea theory, but talk about politically tough to implement!  Firearms in the school are illegal in most states!  One step at at time...]

I'm sure Greg Hamilton could come up with an appropriate curriculum for the situation...

[JKH: Yeah.  I plan to go to him once I get critical mass on this.]