Educational Exercises Aimed At School Shootings, Drug Abuse Result In Terrorized Students And K-9 Attacks
from the administrators-and-cops:-both-woefully-underqualified-to-educateq dept
In what seems to be a continuance of the questionable "scared straight" programs (questioned by no less that the DOJ), schools are involving kids in drills ostensibly aimed at educating them about how to react in extremely rare situations. Recently, we covered a so-called "drill" that involved a hijacked bus full of kids, which was "defused" in front of an audience comprised mainly of educators and people holding the local PD's purse strings. It was a rousing success, if your measurement standard starts at "everyone dies" and tops out at "no one was injured." This was portrayed as an essential bit of "anti-terrorism" training and an educational experience for bus drivers and students, but considering it all played out in front of town officials, the ultimate purpose seemed to be nothing more than a chance for the cops to play dress-up and get all duded up in some underused tactical gear.
Scott Greenfield covers another bit of "education" aimed at, well, who knows what exactly. The new concern is the "active shooter," and several schools are performing drills onsite in order to train staff (and children) how to react in case of school shooting.
Today, schools are engaging in active shooter drills. Trying to impute the best of faith to those who came up with the idea, it’s because this is perceived as the most likely tragedy that a school can face. It may not be likely, but it does happen. So why not be prepared?There's more stupidity here, including the fact that children aren't being informed that these are, in fact, drills.
"If you missed last week’s 'mad gunman terrorizes American schoolchildren' news story,this time out of North Carolina, don’t feel bad; these days they’re common enough that it’s not reasonable to expect any one person can keep up with them all.
Still, last week’s story was notable for two reasons: One, nobody actually got shot; and two, the gunman was on the school’s payroll. Seriously: Administrators at Eastern Wayne Middle School later sent parents a letter explaining that they sent a masked gunman to various sixth-grade classrooms as an 'enrichment lesson on exhibiting good citizenship and observing your surroundings.'"
The explanation letter, reducing a basic concept of disaster preparedness to the idiocy of “exhibiting good citizenship” (a good citizen does not get shot?) can be forgiven. To the extent school administrators were ever capable of using comprehensible language to explain something clearly and accurately, they are now paid by the jargon phrase used and can’t be expected to forget the entirety of their education and experience. Just ignore it.
A suburban Chicago high school ran a “code red” drill with the gunmen shooting blanks in January. Last month, an Indiana school ran a shooting drill replete with blood and a body count.The potential for harm, either physical or emotional, is high. "Preparing" students for a highly unlikely event by terrorizing them teaches them nothing more than "this situation is terrifying." It's highly doubtful anyone from the administration side is learning anything either. If they were, they might realize how counterproductive it is to prepare for an event you can't control by inducing a uninformed state of panic in the student body. No amount of tying "try not to die" to citizenship ideals is going to change that.
Last year, an El Paso, Tex., school set up a shocking surprise lockdown simulation that enraged parents like Stephanie Belcher, whose son sent her a panicked text message.
“He said, ‘I’m not kidding. There’s gunshots and people screaming and we were locked in a storage closet,’ ” Belcher told KFOX-TV. “These kids thought that their classmates were being killed and that they could be next. There’s no excuse for that.”
But cops and admins like drills, especially when it gives law enforcement a chance to show off their "tools" (often just guns and tactical gear). Cops and admins also like teaching kids that any policy- or law-violating act is sure to result in swift and zealous punishment.
In Brazil, Indiana, Judge J. Blaine Akers decided to kick off a weeklong "Red Ribbon Awareness" event at the courthouse by grabbing some local elementary school students and subjecting them to a simulated drug search. Things went predictably bad.
According to the report, the officer and his K-9 partner, Max, as well as another K-9 team were requested by Clay County Superior Court Judge J. Blaine Akers to carry out a simulated raid of a party with actors in place to help "educate the Clay County fifth-graders on drug awareness."In appreciation for his participation in this bizarre "simulation," the fifth grader was gifted with a free trip to the hospital to treat puncture wounds. There's a lot that's impossibly stupid about this judge's ill-advised "demonstration," but there apparently wasn't a single cop who thought this might be a bad idea -- certainly not beforehand and, judging from the post-incident comments, not in hindsight, either.
He added the juveniles in the scenario met with officers prior to the start and were asked to remain still when the dogs searched for narcotics.
McQueen said a very small amount of illegal drugs were hidden on one of the juveniles to show how the dogs can find even the smallest trace of an illegal substance. He added all this was done "under exclusive control and supervision of members of the court and law enforcement." Four scenarios were carried out that day with the incident occurring during the third scenario.
"As I got closer to the actors, Max began searching the juveniles," according to the officer's report. "The first male juvenile began moving his legs around as Max searched him. When the male began moving his legs, (this is what) I believe prompted Max's action to bite the male juvenile on the left calf."
"It was an unfortunate accident," said Brazil Police Chief Clint McQueen. "Wish it hadn't happened like that but it did. We are trying to evaluate (the incident) to make sure nothing like this happens again."Easy. Don't subject people, whether they're elementary student or adults, to fake drug sweeps, especially if you're going to plant drugs on them and send a dog trained to react aggressively to drugs and sudden movements out to give them a nasal patdown.
There's also this, as was pointed out by criminal defense lawyer Robert Fickman:
What's important to note within this story beyond the obvious, is the unstated ease in which the cops planted dope on the child.That's comforting news for anyone who's had a law enforcement officer touch their person or belongings. Also comforting? The fact that the officers pursued statements from other children to corroborate their story.
The other K-9 officer met with Walters after the incident and said that several other children involved in the scenario saw the young man shake his legs when Max approached.
McQueen said the incident was not anything "out of control," but just a quick reaction by the dog to the young man's sudden movement.Kids move. Kids get nervous or bored or uncomfortable and move. Even adults, innocent adults, get nervous when engaging with law enforcement and will move inadvertently. These officers put kids in the path of an animal that's been trained to be half-investigator, half-weapon and expected everything to go well.
And all of this was, according to the judge who set it up, an "educational" experience meant to raise "drug awareness." But in practice, it's little more than Scared Straight Lite. Instead of spending time with criminals, kids are spending more and more time in the presence of armed officers -- people they believe are supposed to be their protectors but whose actual mileage may vary after being bitten by an attack dog or locked in a closet listening to gunshots and screaming.
On the other hand, perhaps some sort of educational growth is being obtained, although it certainly isn't what those ordering this drills and exercises would hope to be the outcome. Kids may be learning that law enforcement officers are inscrutable and possibly dangerous. They may be learning that inadvertent movements, if viewed as "threatening" or "sudden" by officers (and their dogs), are instantly punishable by the application of pain... or worse. They may also be learning that those in power entertain themselves by performing a whole lot of dubious "somethings" that toy with the emotional health of those under their control, solely in order to show constituents that they're on top of the problem -- whether it's school shootings, drug use or plain old disobedience.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: dogs, law enforcement, overreaction, school shootings
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
How comforting to know that after a student has been injured and sent the hospital, none of the officials thought to stop the exhibition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TSA drill (pun not intended)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You've got a masked gunman breaking into a school, 'shooting' children with blanks(which are more than capable of causing serious harm, improperly used), either locking them in closets or causing such panic that they did it themselves, causing them to think that their friends are being gunned down... if someone did that as a 'prank', they'd have every law in the book thrown at them, but when a school administrator does it suddenly there's 'nothing to be alarmed' about it?
Every single person involved in that needs to be fined, forced to pay any resulting counseling costs, and fired, with such a massive public shaming that they would never again be able to be employed in a position where they can make such a monumentally bad decision affecting others ever again.
Likewise with the dog bite story, in a case like that, dealing with an animal that has been specifically trained to not only go on high alert the second it smells drugs, but to aggressively take down resisting suspects, and then to let it free on easily startled school-kids... what the hell did they think was going to happen?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There are two laws: There is a law for you—and there is a law for them.
If the police put you or your children in genuine fear for your life, then it's just one of those things, and there won't be any consequences.
If you or your child do anything at all that a government lawyer can argue puts them in “genuine” fear for their life, limb, property or dignity—then they shoot you. Then you are dead.
A law for you—and a law for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
n.
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear so produced.
3. government or resistance to government by means of terror.
Which means if the Government is so eager to fight terrorism it should start by cleaning their own yard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"A person commits an assault when, without lawful authority, he or she knowingly engages in conduct which places another in reasonable apprehension of receiving a battery."
"A person commits aggravated assault when, in committing an assault, he or she does any of the following:
(1) Uses a deadly weapon... or any device manufactured and designed to be substantially similar in appearance to a firearm..."
The only possible defense in this case is that the action was done under "lawful authority". Otherwise, this is clearly aggravated assault. One count per student in the school. Whether it's a felony or class A misdemeanor depends on the exact gun used.
And as far as the dog thing goes, this is Indiana law:
"A person having the care of a dependent, whether assumed voluntarily or because of a legal obligation, who knowingly or intentionally... places the dependent in a situation that endangers the dependent's life or health... commits neglect of a dependent, a Class D felony. However, the offense is a Class C felony if it ...results in bodily injury..."
Placing the child near the dog clearly endangered their health, and I'm pretty sure the courts have ruled that students are in the care of the school while they are there. 'In loco parentis' and all that. If the schools want the extra rights this doctrine gives them to do certain things, they have to accept the increased responsibility as well.
Yes, I seriously believe the increased penalties for being in their care are called for. The children are not free to leave.
That's 1 count of the class C felony for the student who was bitten, and 1 count of the class D felony for every student who was searched by a dog for no reason.
Let's also tack on drug charges to the officers involved, since they didn't have a legitimate reason to plant drugs. And they distributed the drugs to a minor. If it was "a controlled substance, pure or adulterated, classified in schedule I, II, or III, except marijuana, hash oil, hashish, salvia, or a synthetic cannabinoid" that is a class A felony in Indiana.
"As used in this chapter, 'minimum sentence' means... for a Class A felony, twenty (20) years;"
Of course, no prosecutor would ever actually charge anyone involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
One of these times they'll have the 'gunman' break into a classroom and threaten the students with what appears to be a lethal weapon, one of the students will assume the worst, and they'll grab whatever's closest to them and take out the 'attacker' in an attempt to protect the other students. After all the excuse given was to educate students in 'exhibiting good citizenship', and what better example of that could you have than someone trying to protect others from someone trying to kill them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The alternative would be that the harm and/or death of the 'gunman' was entirely the fault of the person/people who hired them to go around terrorizing children, and since those people could sooner fly by flapping their arms than admit to being wrong, they would almost certainly blame, and continue to blame, the 'violent student for his/her unprovoked attack'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Laws that protect us from dangerous animals
So... It's OK if your attack-trained dog injures someone? Good to know. It's not like the police can say they were doing their jobs, and therefore supposedly above the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Texas...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Texas...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's the big deal? You kids play "First Person Shooter" games!
[Disclaimer: YES, I'm partly sarcastic here. But if you hold that there's nothing inherently wrong with FPS "games" in which YOU simulate murdering people, then THIS is the kind of society you're going to get. In reality, you can't pick and choose just the one perspective you want.]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the big deal? You kids play "First Person Shooter" games!
That however is a mental impairment not something to be pandered to by the other 99.999%* of the population.
*Figures in the US will be lower.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The difference:
The other is real and involves the death or harm of an actual person.
Anyone who can't tell the difference between the two has serious issues to work out, as they are displaying a stunning lack of the ability to separate fantasy from reality, a serious problem that usually gets people committed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The difference:
This does seem to explain a certain someone's arguments here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the big deal? You kids play "First Person Shooter" games!
Here's another idea: Set it up as a paintball event with all the students, parents and teachers aware of the event and allowed to opt out. Provide the required safety apparatuses. Everyone would probably have a good time and still be well aware about what would happen in a real emergency.
There is an incidental cost from the panic in an actual emergency that doesn't occur during the drills. The point of the drill is to train people on what to do during the emergency in order to eliminate or at least reduce this panic. If the drill is not obviously a drill, the incidental cost the drill is designed to alleviate will still be paid, rendering the drill a pointless waste.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the big deal? You kids play "First Person Shooter" games!
That requires actual training or a mental disorder.
All video games can do is desensitize SOME people to some images of violence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Clarification
A mental disorder does not substitute for weapons training any more than it would substitute for flight school.
And while some of us game enthusiasts would like to see games in which proper gun handling and maintenance was simulated, it's going to be a while. And it still won't substitute for hands-on practice.
As of this posting I have not received a US National Security Letter or any classified gag order from an agent of the United States
Encrypted with Morbius-Cochrane Perfect Steganographic Codec 1.2.001
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:16:38 AM
cook blister valley consonant graffiti aspirin saviour tray
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Clarification
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Clarification
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the big deal? You kids play "First Person Shooter" games!
Americans love their guns, and enjoy buying them, and those who do mostly entertain themselves by shooting small objects, hunting, or fantasing about self defense.
The Japanese also love guns, and created an entire sport centered around them - Airsoft - with many, many schools having Airsoft clubs - where students train military tactics, marksmanship and weapon maintenance. Again, yes, they have Airsoft gun clubs in schools, and noone there thinks they are learning how to murder innocent people.
As for games like the last Grand Theft Auto, well, those games are not for kids. They are for ages 17+. The parents that allow a minor to play them is more or less as irresponsible as if they let that kid see porn movies, smoke tabacco or drink booze. But what is that so special about a kid turning 17 and being allowed to play this game? Well, i invite you to tell me your opinion - does the average american 17 old adolescent has enough maturity to distinguish fact from fiction? Is that a reasonable age that an individual should be allowed to be exposed to content considered mature? Please remember that there are plenty of content in TV and Magazines and Movies that are far more disturbing than GTA V. As example, the movie "Pain & Gain", who actualy based in a true story that got published in the newspaper miaminewtimes. (http://www.miaminewtimes.com/2000-01-06/news/pain-gain-part-3/)
And as a last point of contention, i would argue that PayDay2 is a better crime simulator than GTA V ever will be. And thus, much more entertainment for law abbiding citizens.
Sincerely,
Brazilian Guy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reasonable demonstrations
Cover three dog bowls with a plastic stool, inside of one of which is drugs. Unleash the dog and demonstrate that it heads unerringly to the bowl with the drugs.
Have a Police Officer don a heavily padded armband and bait the dog, ensuring the padded arm remains the closest limb to the animal. The dog then locks the padded arm in its jaws and the Police Officer demonstrates that he can't pull free of the bite.
I may be a little fuzzy on the details. It's been a while since I attended such a demonstration.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reasonable demonstrations
Education through intimidation, rather than logic basically.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reasonable demonstrations
THAT is a far more likely scenario...
Donut eaters r not your friends...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reasonable demonstrations
I can't imagine I would have been able to keep still if one of those German Sheppard's was sniffing round my ankles. I also remember the dog handlers being very careful to keep the dogs away from us. This judge should be locked up for organizing such a stupid exercise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brazil
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
active shooter scenario
As for the simulated drug searches, this makes sense because the police are preparing the students for future, non-simulated, random drug searches. The child being bitten teaches all the other kids they must remain still.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now, that was over a decade ago, guns must be far more common in schools. I mean, that's the only reason I can think of to necessitate swat team like active shooter drills for children. Shouldn't these people be worried about someone shooting back, or even worse, joining them?
The preceding was only partially sarcastic. I'm a relatively intelligent adult, not a teenager going threw a rebellious phase. God only knows how I would react during one of these drills, let alone after one of these drills, if I was a kid. PTSD is a bitch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: someone shooting back
Good thing they do this in a place where carry permits are typically invalid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Another option for the slightly less daring is to barricade the door with a bookcase held in place by a pile of desks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bat-shit crazy..
Scared Straight failed because it used typical prison euphemisms in order to show how scary it was to be in prison rather than actually tell the students what the convict's life was actually like before and in prison.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bat-shit crazy..
Perhaps so, but I know from talking to kids who took part in it that at least with them, it failed because it was so over-the-top that they found it funny. But perhaps we're saying the same thing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bat-shit crazy..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The new concern is the "active shooter,"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
public school
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: public school
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: public school
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Man I am old
N.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...
As an attorney, this immediately sets off alarm bells as to the constitutionality of the raids, the effects on the kids, and the liability of the officers and school officials.
As a parent who happens to be an attorney, may the gods have mercy on the souls of whatever school and law enforcement officials approve or participate in this kind of "exercise" at any of my kids schools.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ...
The constitution doesn't seem to count for much any more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So who are the terrorists?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just More Security Theatre
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What does "terrorism" mean?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So why not be prepared?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Important lessons indeed
"Don't trust an alarm"
"Interacting with authorities results in direct personal harm"
What is it they're training for exactly? The future is going to HURT.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In My Very Humble Opinion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I guess we know why school administrators took the kid tweeting that he was going to drill his teammates as a threat if this is what their definition of "drill" is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Complex Issues
Although it clearly isn't thorough enough, at least they had the hind sight to send a letter to the parents. Though they clearly should have had the prudence to get permission. But who would subject their children to such a thing? Even if they did, who would let their children go to school without forewarning of the event? Knowledge that it wasn't real would probably negate any possible benefit that could come from the scenario.
Is there any possible benefit that could even come from said scenario?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]