How should kids react in a school shooting?

I ask because apparently this school district's possible new plan (In Massachusetts of all places) is to have kids react and try and take out a school shooter.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Controversy Erupts Over School Proposal to Teach Kids to Fight Back Against Gunmen

A proposal to teach children as young as 10 years old to fight back against a classroom gunman is causing quite a stir in a small town in Massachusetts.

The Georgetown Public Schools in Georgetown, Mass., are considering a proposal to teach kids to fend off a gunman with backpacks or textbooks as part of a proposal to revamp their "Code Blue" safety policy.

Those who support the idea say it may seem extreme, but it could save a child's life.

Georgetown Police Chief James E. Mulligan told FOXNews.com the proposed technique was intended to be a "last ditch" thing to be used in cases where a gunman has been able to thwart police and get inside a classroom alone with students.

But others think the last thing you want to teach young kids is how to fight off an intruder with a gun.

"To put that expectation on young, emotional, scared, frightened children is really a slippery slope," says Kenneth Trump, the president of National School Safety and Security Services. "It has a high risk and higher probability of escalating a situation than it would to neutralize the situation."

The controversy began when the district's school resource officer, Derek Jones, proposed the training in a memo after hearing it had been used in schools in Florida.

"[He] was starting the conversation with us to say, well, ‘Do we want the kids to sit there and literally have the gunman be able to shoot them one at a time? Or do we want to allow instincts to kick in and basically allow them to protect themselves against the threat?'" Carol Jacobs, the district superintendent, told FOXNews.com.

"It might include using a book or hiding behind a backpack or something, some kind of shield."

Jacobs said the proposal to teach kids in fifth grade and up how to ward off armed attackers in a worst-case scenario created some concern among administrators.

"We had immediate discomfort with all of this because it’s not the way we’ve thought about it in the past, and also, we worry a little bit more about the liability of all of this," she said.

Jones' memo was intended only for school officials updating the school safety policy in Georgetown, a coastal community north of Boston, but it was leaked to the media before the district's safety committee could even discuss it, leading to concern among parents.

"A lot of kids come from unsafe places at home, and school is their only haven, you know, and for them to come into school and have to think about that stuff I think can be scary," parent Hope Carter told MyFOXBoston.com.

Barbie Linares, who has three children in the district, including a 10-year-old, said she has confidence in how the school administration deals with proposals.

"If it was going to be implemented, I would hope that it would be implemented in, say, fifth grade and above, or middle school and above," she told FOXNews.com. "I do think that it would be better off with the older kids."

Trump said it makes more sense to train school staff to deal with a gunman.

"We’re asking them to make some quite serious judgments that even trained adults are challenged to make," he said. "I think that’s an unrealistic and highly risky expectation and burden to put on kids."

Current policy, Mulligan said, is on par with districts across the country, allowing police to enter a school in lockdown and engage an attacker "to minimize the harm to children and staff in the school."

Officials say the Georgetown community is safe. The only recent activity was an unfounded bomb threat six months ago that lead to a school evacuation.

The safety committee plans to discuss the Code Blue proposals on Thursday.

"The intention here is just to make sure that we are always on the cutting edge of what we need to do to keep our kids safe and obviously to learn from lessons of tragedies in other places," Jacobs said.

It seems to me this is the sort of thing we hate to have to teach kids, but that could be better than not having them do anything in the event of a school shooting.

This quote:

Quote:

---

"To put that expectation on young, emotional, scared, frightened children is really a slippery slope," says Kenneth Trump, the president of National School Safety and Security Services. "It has a high risk and higher probability of escalating a situation than it would to neutralize the situation."

---

Seemed illogical to me. How would it escalate a situation? When you've got a person actively shooting at children, how would they escalate their actions? Would they, perhaps, scream profanities as well?

It seems to me, in a school shooting, you're already in the worst case scenario and you want to do what you can to mitigate the results. I suppose you could say the kids being targeted are escalating their actions - but in that case escalation from sitting and being shot to trying to stop the shooter would be a good thing.

CR

Bad idea. The minute a child dies confronting the gunman the school system will end up in court. It's different if the parents tell them this or they react on their own.

Basic rule in a school shooting: Get the :devil: out!

The only sensible and above all American solution is to give all the kids guns. Only if everyone is armed is anyone safe... :inquisitive:

Some sort of system where doors can be automatically locked would be an idea - teachers can access a panic switch and all doors go into lockdown. The cheap option would be for standard doors that will merely slow a determined person down, the more expensive option would make all doors bullet resistant. Worst case scenario one class is decimated, then the gunman is trapped.


Getting soldiers to act in an environment where shots are fired is difficult enough. Getting unarmed children to act in a rational manner and not blindly panic is optimistic IMO.

Of course if the training does work, woe betide the police in the next riot when the tooled up, self defence experts take them on... :boxing:

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Bad idea. The minute a child dies confronting the gunman the school system will end up in court. It's different if the parents tell them this or they react on their own.

Basic rule in a school shooting: Get the :devil: out!

---

Running as fast in the other direction as possible is a good idea; but most schools tend to keep kids in the classroom in such events.

Quote:

---

Some sort of system where doors can be automatically locked would be an idea - teachers can access a panic switch and all doors go into lockdown. The cheap option would be for standard doors that will merely slow a determined person down, the more expensive option would make all doors bullet resistant. Worst case scenario one class is decimated, then the gunman is trapped.

---

I think the phrase you want is 'prohibitively expensive'.

Quote:

---

Getting unarmed children to act in a rational manner and not blindly panic is optimistic IMO.

---

Yes, but better than nothing when the kids are trapped in a classroom with a shooter. If it doesn't work, then the kids are no worse off, but if they can stop the shooter that would be good.

CR

It is a sensible idea as a last-ditch option. I mean, if I saw my classmates being shot, and I knew I was going to be killed soon, I would run away from the killer. If I couldn't run, I wouldn't have much of a choice but to fight, now would I?

Honestly, if you're locked in a room with a killer who is shooting your friends one by one, how could you not try to disarm him?

Admit it, CR- you're moving to Mass now. :smartass2:

Anyways, regarding the decision- I think its personally better than nothing, assuming that they're not teaching the kids to do something really moronic like trying to give the shooter a tongue lashing or something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seireikhaan

Anyways, regarding the decision- I think its personally better than nothing, assuming that they're not teaching the kids to do something really moronic like trying to give the shooter a tongue lashing or something.

---

It's Massachusetts, not the UK. *I'll get my coat...*

Quote:

---

Admit it, CR- you're moving to Mass now. :smartass2:

---

Nah, I'm much to content here.

CR

The kids would have to have some serious mental discipline if they were to pull if off. It's tragic, but there's really very little that can be done when you're in those kinds of situations. :no:

The best self defense ever: not being in the situation in the first place.

Second best: Run away. Fast.

See? I still remember the combat training I learned in the army....

So kids should play truant to aviod school shootings? :smartass:

These guys have made up their mind, run. Which should be pretty obvious. But why make a trend out of incidents, horrible as they may be, that is just inviting the next crybaby.

Well, some 60 years ago soldiers were trained to run up an almost empty beach protected by fortified bunkers at the top to solve a problem, maybe they thought it is time to go back to the old way of solving violent problems. :sweatdrop:
In the end it all depends on the situation, like a bunker is vulnerable from behind, a gunman is usually vulnerable when he enters through a door, but in most cases you are likely to end up dead if you cannot use the element of surprise to your advantage.
In both cases the best solution is to prevent the problem in it's early stages, which so far hasn't happened often.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Yes, but better than nothing when the kids are trapped in a classroom with a shooter. If it doesn't work, then the kids are no worse off, but if they can stop the shooter that would be good.

---

No. When the kids get shot when they fail to stop the gunman(you're kidding yourself if you think anything else will happen), they're wasting their life as well as valuable time they could've used to run away and live.

Seriously, doing anything else than run when there's a guy with a gun trying to kill you is the dumbest thing you can ever do. And it'll be the last dumb thing you do in your life. The natural instinct is to run. That's what they should do, and it's what gives the best chance of survival.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

No. When the kids get shot when they fail to stop the gunman(you're kidding yourself if you think anything else will happen), they're wasting their life as well as valuable time they could've used to run away and live.

Seriously, doing anything else than run when there's a guy with a gun trying to kill you is the dumbest thing you can ever do. And it'll be the last dumb thing you do in your life. The natural instinct is to run. That's what they should do, and it's what gives the best chance of survival.

---

Maybe you missed the part where I said the kids are trapped in the same room as the gunman. Most school classrooms have one door; the kids cannot run anywhere if the gunman is in the doorway.

Also, you'll be interested to know standard procedure in a school is not to have the kids run, but to lock the door and hide in a classroom if the kids are in class.

Oh, and about kids not stopping a gunman;
http://www.cnn.com/US/9805/21/school.shooting.2/

Quote:

---

A male student who had been expelled from an Oregon high school opened fire with a rifle in the school cafeteria on Thursday, killing at least one student, authorities said. They said they are also investigating reports of killings at the boy's home. About 25 other students were reported wounded or injured in the incident at Thurston High School in Springfield.

The gunman, who was taken into custody, was not immediately identified. He had been expelled on Wednesday for trying to bring a gun to class, police said. Witnesses said the gunman was tackled by other students.

---

Gee, it looks like not running saved lives. So much for being 'dumb'.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

No. When the kids get shot when they fail to stop the gunman(you're kidding yourself if you think anything else will happen), they're wasting their life as well as valuable time they could've used to run away and live.

Seriously, doing anything else than run when there's a guy with a gun trying to kill you is the dumbest thing you can ever do. And it'll be the last dumb thing you do in your life. The natural instinct is to run. That's what they should do, and it's what gives the best chance of survival.

---

HoreTore, this is talking about when you are in a classroom, or backed into a corner with no chance of escape. Most classrooms have only one door as well as a few windows, all of which are generally locked and closed when an intruder enters the school. In this common scenario, the students will have no choice whatsoever.

If I look back at Virginia Tech...what if five guys, or ten guys, had gone after the shooter? He can't stop them. He can take out a few, but he will be subdued. It would've saved lives.

It is always frustrating that one guy with a gun can hold fifty, or five hundred people ransom. Quite unbearable. Disregarding al the if's and but's of Rambo fantasies and the danger of lynch mobs and permanently alarmed and scared kids in constant war mode, the point remains that a massive combined attack will take out anybody and will save lives in certain instances. (Flight 93? :2thumbsup:)
It is better to die on your feet than to die on your knees.



In a weird twist of argument, I am an avid watcher of wildlife films. It always strikes me how five lions can attack a herd of three-thousand zebra. That's an awful lot of beef and hooves. With some co-ordination, the lions would be nowhere. In fact, a few small, weak apes thought pretty much that one million years ago. They got themselves a few sticks and pebbles, learned how to co-ordinate counter attacks, and now every predator in Africa runs for cover when he sees humans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Also, you'll be interested to know standard procedure in a school is not to have the kids run, but to lock the door and hide in a classroom if the kids are in class.

---

Yes your correct. I live in MA actually somewhere near the town in the story. You see in MA you get outside 128 and the outstretched stench of Havard/cambridge and you actually find moderates. Yes the children are kept in the classroom, they do not have the option to get up and run out as the teachers job in this situation is to prevent anyone from leaving the class.

I know this because I was present when the procedures for "school emergencies" were discussed after the college incidents. Essentially what it comes down to is a numbers game.... The assumption is that the shooter will not go into every room and or dosent have enough rounds to kill every kid in every classroom.

So if the classroom he picks has your kid in it, metaphorically you've won the lottery (by the logic of the procedures in place). So even as a parent if you want your kid to run, the teacher who's salary you pay will prevent it or in theory loose there job as violators of the district policy.

Quote:

---

Yes, but better than nothing when the kids are trapped in a classroom with a shooter. If it doesn't work, then the kids are no worse off, but if they can stop the shooter that would be good.

---

Essentially this makes the above statement by rabbit correct. If your child is the lottery winner they can hid in the corner and again hope they dont win the lottery and are selected for execution or they can attempt to bring down the shooter. Somehow for me as a dad if I got that call I would take a sliver of solace knowing my kid tried to fight back rather then hiding in a corner hoping not to die, but people think Im nuts anyway.

The best time to foil a plot is at it infancy when the perp hasnt had the time to prep the situation or take command. Waiting and hoping might save some lives but it dosent negate the potential for a succesful outcome via the alternate route proposed. Of course the first best choice is to run but that isnt an option in a lot of schools now, so if you win the lottery and the guy chooses your kids classroom and the outcome is death, death while fighting back, and fighting back and disarming I'll go with the last 2 options because the result is not predetermined and can result in a positive outcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

If I look back at Virginia Tech...what if five guys, or ten guys, had gone after the shooter? He can't stop them. He can take out a few, but he will be subdued. It would've saved lives.

---

Yes, you go first, I'll be right behind you. :sweatdrop:

The problem is obviously not about guns or children, rules or even the shooters, the biggest problem is obviously that classrooms lack doors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Yes, you go first, I'll be right behind you. :sweatdrop:

---

It goes without saying that I consider going first an honour and a sacred duty. My personal sense of sacrifice is so strong that in the interest of all I shall make the urge to go first subordinate to the need to coordinate you lot though. :shrug:

Argh. School-shootings, Shootings at schools. Isn't it a bit overreacting to call it a school shooting, as if it isn't something that hardly ever happens why make cult out of nothing.

Quote:

---

Oh, and about kids not stopping a gunman;

---

Yes they got lucky and tackled him when his gun was empty and he was having trouble reloading it .

Quote:

---

Yes, you go first, I'll be right behind you.

---

Some bastard did that to me once , while two of us jumped the gamekeeper the little git ran in the other direction

Fire escape?
Single door, then windows.

Better still multiple doors on opposite sides of the room allowing outside access.

Simply put make it hard for fire or firearms to trap the kids.

One exit from a classroom? What genius thought that was a good idea? :dizzy2:

Forget about shooters, what about fire? What idiots do you people have building your schools? :inquisitive:

TBH i think most of my comprehensive (12-16) classrooms only had the one door, the windows in most of them would have been very hard to get out of, do-able but it would take a minute for me and im fairly agile, any fat kid would have just got stuck.

Im unsure about this... on the one hand surely it is better for someone to try and tackle the shooter if people are stuck in a classroom with him anyway, though i really don't see 10 year olds doing too much, a few older teenagers perhaps...... on the other hand you don't want to encourage teenage boys to have rambo fanatasies about taking down a shooter, trying to tackle the guy should be a last resort, i would tell my kid to get the hell out of there

of course if it was me in the school i would be rambo, but all boys like to think like that, and that thinking shouldn't be encouraged in kids...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Forget about shooters, what about fire? What idiots do you people have building your schools? :inquisitive:

---

Possibly Germans, the old buildings of my high school also had only one exit AFAIK, at least those above ground level, the new buildings offer seperate fire exits though. It's definitely not a bad idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Bad idea. The minute a child dies confronting the gunman the school system will end up in court. It's different if the parents tell them this or they react on their own.

Basic rule in a school shooting: Get the :devil: out!

---

School down in Texas wanted to do it to I believe, read about it in Late '06.


Good Idea Vladimir! Just get out. If you can't though, fight back! I rather die fighting then sit there under a damn table and die a embrassing down!


"But Warman, More kids could die then!"


Really? And sitting under a library table be safer? Yeah, That worked wonders for kids at Columbine! :inquisitive::inquisitive:

https://img148.imageshack.us/my.php?...ydebaterx0.jpg

In my high school -- the height of late 60s early 70s design -- fewer than 1 classroom in 4 had any windows. All of those windows were less than 12" wide. None of those windows were designed to open -- ever. On the other hand, each of the classrooms were three-walled affairs with no fourth wall.

My other schools were more traditionally designed. One door on the hallway side, two solid sidewalls, one wall lined with windows opposite the door. All of the windows had one panel (12" by 32") that would open (on a pivot, often at the mid-point of the pane so that no student could climb out). Window egress could really only have been effected by a) throwing things through the windows unitl they broke. Tearing the swivel panels off of their hinges. I don't recall having more than a handful of classrooms with more than one door.

AFAIK most of these events happen with students that have been suspended/expelled;it would make sense to control who can come in and out of a school; swipe cards/access control would be a much better way of stopping someone getting into the school then teaching kids to charge the trenchesgunmen.

I think this sort of thinking is all cartage in front of the horse type of problem solving. stop the school shootings before they happen or restrict the movement within the school.

i would of thought that it might be better to evacuate when possible instead of staying put.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beren Son Of Barahi

i would of thought that it might be better to evacuate when possible instead of staying put.

---

School officials assume that such an evacuation would not be orderly and would actually become a panicked stampede. This, many feel, would result in deaths from trampling and possible worse death totals if the stampede heads the wrong way.

I actually think the current doctrine (modified) would work better...if the teacher behind the barricaded door was themselves armed. But, then again, I'm one of those power-crazed gun nut types [note, sarcasm].

I think it would be better if there could be more organisation during an actual shooting event, classes too close to the shooter could simply lock the door and stay put, whilst other classes which are far enough away could make a safe exit quickly. This would rely on some knowledge of the shooters position and direction he's heading and some ability to communicate this information to all the teachers, maybe read out the shooters movements over the pa system, could annoy the shooter though...

It would probably be a really good idea to have quick exits for all classrooms possible, fire exits on ground levels and stairs built to classes off ground level, its a bit of expense but probably worth it...

Bullet proof steel doors and bullet proof windows, costs a lot to buy burt they cannot come in anymore, unless they move on to school shootings with RPGs. Preferably all those doors can be locked remotely by the principal and/or the security personnel, then add some vidya cameras, machine gun turrets and flame thrower barriers, a bunch of marines with an APC as a rapid deploament security force and your kids are finally secure. Expect a little rise in schooling costs or taxes though.

edit: Alternatively you could try a MAD scenario and put a tactical nuke into the cellar of the school.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

School officials assume that such an evacuation would not be orderly and would actually become a panicked stampede. This, many feel, would result in deaths from trampling and possible worse death totals if the stampede heads the wrong way.

---

Uhm.... Fire drills, anyone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Uhm.... Fire drills, anyone?

---

fire is MUCH different than a school shooting.
war is hell. school shootings are comaprable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

fire is MUCH different than a school shooting.
war is hell. school shootings are comaprable.

---

So.... they're too hysterical to evacuate properly, but they're not too hysterical to jump a guy shooting at them?

A school shooting is usually done by someone with no regard for hostages or loss of life. I firmly believe that if you are going to die, you might as well die trying to take down the shooter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

So.... they're too hysterical to evacuate properly, but they're not too hysterical to jump a guy shooting at them?

---

No, you've got it reversed.

The point being made is that a school shooting is on a whole other level of "OMFG" than the school being on fire. Hence, people will be more likely to stampede out during a shooting than during a fire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seireikhaan

No, you've got it reversed.

The point being made is that a school shooting is on a whole other level of "OMFG" than the school being on fire. Hence, people will be more likely to stampede out during a shooting than during a fire.

---

stampedes=chaos.
chaos=more loss of life than is needed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

stampedes=chaos.
chaos=more loss of life than is needed

---

Ok...

Wasn't arguing with you. :inquisitive:

oops. it was meant for HoreTore. sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seireikhaan

No, you've got it reversed.

The point being made is that a school shooting is on a whole other level of "OMFG" than the school being on fire. Hence, people will be more likely to stampede out during a shooting than during a fire.

---

Hmmm....

But they're likely to be able to take down a shooter effectively? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Hmmm....

But they're likely to be able to take down a shooter effectively? :inquisitive:

---

better take the chance. "fortune favors the bold"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

better take the chance. "fortune favors the bold"

---

"we run away to fight another day" ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

better take the chance. "fortune favors the bold"

---

I'd say taking the chance of a stampede may even have the better results, I don't think it happens THAT often that more than one person gets killed in a stampede, running towards someone with an automatic or semi automatic weapon through a really long corridor however is likely to get a lot of people killed.
So how about a superstrong magnet in the basement? Everybody just takes off their bling bling, they have one minute and then everything made from metal will be glued to the ground, including guns. :idea2:

Surely having teacher trying to assertain where the gun man is (a lot of schools are spread out and one could most likley work out if they are near by with listening alone) and then getting the students TFO of there asap is better then staying there and waiting for them to go away. surely a few classes at a time could make a run for it. treat it like a hostage situation not a school shooting. Get as many out as possible safely and then deal with the takers as you can.


fortune might favour the bold, but it kills the brave.

controlling who can and can't come onto the campus is better then drilling students to take out a gunmen....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

"we run away to fight another day" ~;)

---

fight another day? youre the one who wants them to run away! how can they fight again if you are advocating not fighting in the first place? so they should run away just to run away again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

I'd say taking the chance of a stampede may even have the better results, I don't think it happens THAT often that more than one person gets killed in a stampede, running towards someone with an automatic or semi automatic weapon through a really long corridor however is likely to get a lot of people killed.
So how about a superstrong magnet in the basement? Everybody just takes off their bling bling, they have one minute and then everything made from metal will be glued to the ground, including guns. :idea2:

---

no, it wont. chances are there will be more kids dead, since in the stampede the slow kids will be knocked down, leaving them to the mercy of the shooter. now considering our obesity rates....

fight another day? youre the one who wants them to run away! how can they fight again if you are advocating not fighting in the first place? so they should run away just to run away again?

Well they would be running away to live another day... unless they plan on military, ufc ect.

no, it wont. chances are there will be more kids dead, since in the stampede the slow kids will be knocked down, leaving them to the mercy of the shooter. now considering our obesity rates....

Fat kids tend to be stronger (and more dangerous when stampeding) i would imagine the fat kids would be alright just a bit slow, its the skinny frail ones who aren't athletic that would possibly get knocked over and stampeded over, which obviously isn't any better....

Perhaps there could be some kind of semi organised stampede, release the athletic ones first, they'll sprint ahead and not get in anyones way, then i guess the fatter people.... and leave the frail till last, for thier own protection from the stampede, i suppose it has a kind of unfairness to it, but i would be very pissed off being kept in a classroom with a shooter on the loose....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

fight another day? youre the one who wants them to run away! how can they fight again if you are advocating not fighting in the first place? so they should run away just to run away again?

Well they would be running away to live another day... unless they plan on military, ufc ect.

---

not if there was another school shooting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

no, it wont. chances are there will be more kids dead, since in the stampede the slow kids will be knocked down, leaving them to the mercy of the shooter. now considering our obesity rates....

Fat kids tend to be stronger (and more dangerous when stampeding) i would imagine the fat kids would be alright just a bit slow, its the skinny frail ones who aren't athletic that would possibly get knocked over and stampeded over, which obviously isn't any better....

Perhaps there could be some kind of semi organised stampede, release the athletic ones first, they'll sprint ahead and not get in anyones way, then i guess the fatter people.... and leave the frail till last, for thier own protection from the stampede, i suppose it has a kind of unfairness to it, but i would be very pissed off being kept in a classroom with a shooter on the loose....

---

stampedes are rarely organized. do you think there will be any form of organization when bullets are flying around you? all hell breaks loose. to think otherwise is just plain daft to me.

anyhow, no one can outrun a bullet. even if the fat kids did knock down everyone else, do you think they could outrun the shooter?

Well in reference to the organisation i was simply on about an order in which the teacher would let the kids out of the classroom, after that its chaos....

do you think there will be any form of organization when bullets are flying around you? all hell breaks loose.

I was refering to kids being kept in a classroom whilst the shooter is somewhere else, if the shooter is in the classroom shooting then obviously the teacher wouldn't be keeping the kids in the classroom....

anyhow, no one can outrun a bullet.

No, but if shooter is busy in another classroom you don't need to outrun the bullet, just get out of the school and avoid the shooter, though if the shooter is there looking at you, you probably have more chance trying to run away in zig zags than charging him, thats only going to work with a very brave determined group of students

even if the fat kids did knock down everyone else, do you think they could outrun the shooter?

well in my plan there shouldn't be people for the fat kids to knock down, its not individually that they have to outrun the shooter, if he shooter is in the centre, and 4 fat kids run off round 4 different corners from the shooter then he is at best going to be able to get 2 of them (if they're are very slow fat kids and he's a very fast shooter... and theres not many turnoffs where he can go the wrong way...) likelyhood is in that situation only 1 kid dies....

This isn't some serious plan i want implemented.... more thinking out loud....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

no, it wont. chances are there will be more kids dead, since in the stampede the slow kids will be knocked down, leaving them to the mercy of the shooter. now considering our obesity rates....

---

You mean they can all roll away and noone will get trampled?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

You mean they can all roll away and noone will get trampled?

---

not a bad idea.... :beam:
:laugh4: