10 Myths About School Shootings

[Prof. A. Wickwire]

Interesting article I came across on MSNBC. It points out the difficulty of detection and the actual small scale of school shootings (item 10).

Sincerely,

Prof. A. Wickwire

10 Myths About School Shootings

10 Myths About School Shootings
By Bill Dedman
Investigative reporter
MSNBC

The profile of the gun-toting student in a trench coat is just one of the myths about the rare but murderous attacks in the nation’s schools.

Here are 10 myths about school shootings, compiled by MSNBC.com from a 2002 study by the U.S. Secret Service and the U.S. Department of Education. The researchers studied case files and other primary sources for 37 attacks by current or former students, and also interviewed 10 of the perpetrators.

Myth No. 1. “He didn’t fit the profile.”

In fact, there is no profile. “There is no accurate or useful ‘profile’ of students who engaged in targeted school violence,” the researchers found.

The stereotypes of teens in Goth makeup or other types of dress are not useful in preventing attacks. Just as in other areas of security -- workplace violence, airplane hijacking, even presidential assassination -- too many innocent students will fit any profile you can come up with, and too many attackers will not.

“The demographic, personality, school history, and social characteristics of the attackers varied substantially,” the report said. Attackers were of all races and family situations, with academic achievement ranging from failing to excellent.

Most, but not all, have been male, though that fact alone doesn't help an adult rule in or out someone as dangerous.

Myth No. 2. “He just snapped.”

Rarely were incidents of school violence sudden, impulsive acts. Attackers do not “just snap,” but progress from forming an idea, to planning an attack, to gathering weapons. This process can happen quickly, but sometimes the planning or gathering weapons are discoverable.

Myth No. 3. “No one knew.”

Before most of the attacks, someone else knew about the idea or the plan. "In most cases, those who knew were other kids: friends, schoolmates, siblings and others. However, this information rarely made its way to an adult." Most attackers engaged in some behavior prior to the incident that caused concern or indicated a need for help.

Myth No. 4. “He hadn’t threatened anyone.”

Too much emphasis is placed on threats. Most attackers did not threaten, and most threateners did not attack. A child who talks of bringing a gun to school, or seeking revenge on teachers or classmates, poses a threat, whether or not a threat is made.

Myth No. 5. “He was a loner.”

In many cases, students were considered in the mainstream of the student population and were active in sports, school clubs or other activities.

Only one-quarter of the students hung out with a group of students considered to be part of a “fringe group.”

Myth No. 6. “He was crazy.”

Only one-third of the attackers had ever been seen by a mental health professional, and only one-fifth had been diagnosed with a mental disorder. Substance abuse problems were also not prevalent. “However, most attackers showed some history of suicidal attempts or thoughts, or a history of feeling extreme depression or desperation.” Most attackers had difficulty coping with significant losses or personal failures.

Myth No. 7. “If only we’d had a SWAT team or metal detectors.”

Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most shooting incidents were over well before a SWAT team could have arrived. Metal detectors have not deterred students who were committed to killing themselves and others.

Myth No. 8. “He’d never touched a gun.”

Most attackers had access to weapons, and had used them prior to the attack. Most of the attackers acquired their guns from home.

Myth No. 9. “We did everything we could to help him.”

"Many attackers felt bullied, persecuted or injured by others prior to the attack," and said they had tried without success to get someone to intervene. Administrators and teachers were targeted in more than half the incidents.

Myth No. 10. “School violence is rampant.”

It may seem so, with media attention focused on a spate of school shootings. In fact, school shootings are extremely rare. Even including the more common violence that is gang-related or dispute-related, only 12 to 20 homicides a year occur in the 100,000 schools in the U.S. In general, school assaults and other violence have dropped by nearly half in the past decade.

© 2006 MSNBC Interactive

 

[Rumble]

Huh. I'd just recently attended a seminar on crisis intervention in the schools. A professor at my university was talking about a book she'd written about school crises in general (not just shootings and attacks, but suicides, accidental deaths, etc.). Her research echoed a lot of that, especially the idea that there's no profile--the sample size is too small to create a meaningful picture of the "typical school shooter."

In fact, the only real pattern that can be said to exist is that shooters are mostly male.

 

[gometika]

I remember the movie, Terminator, the first one. The character Reese couldn't single out the Terminator, there's no profile, looks just like human, flesh, bo, everything, he can only confront the cyborg until the last minute when it moved in for the kill.

 

[ID_shooting]

I object to number seven. Of course off-campus police can do nothing to prevent the crime, but ON-CAMPUS armed resistance would be the most effective deterrent

 

[Art Eatman]

ID_shooting, it looks to me like you're missing the point: The Myth exists.

You may be correct in your view of armed guards at a school. But, it's also possible that a guard would be the first victim, followed by other shootings. The point is that you're not dealing with rational thought.

And, if you look at Myth #10, how do you justify the cost of the guard(s)? 100,000 guards at some $30K/yr each, but only a probable maximum of 20 events? Three billion bucks a year for just one guard per school?

Art

 

[KUJO2388]

That was a interesting read. I agree there is no profile. But I do think that all of the kids that do school shooting have something in common. They are screwed up. Just what I think.

 

[The Deer Hunter]

Point being; anyone can be a school "shooter"

 

[ID_shooting]

I didn't say a fire team at each school was feasable, just the most effective.

But then I have silly ideas about schools, things like sports should be the first thing to go if a school is low on funding. I fail to understand the logic of how a school can complain that they do not have the money to pay for teachers, supplies, or modern learning equipment, but they can have top-notch football teams that travel the whole state playing games every weekend.

How many attacks at airports have there been in the last 10 years? Why is there more security at the airport than my local high school?

 

[MechAg94]

I remember hearing at one time that some of them took ridilin or similar drugs, but I guess that isn't a trend either.

 

[RNB65]

Art's right. Schools can barely afford the cost of education and armed guards don't come cheap. Few school systems would be able to afford armed guards.

A volunteer force of retired police/military personnel is a possibility. Or perhaps a small group of teachers who are willing to undergo handgun training and be ready ready to respond to any incidents that occur.

I suspect, in the end, most school systems are going to decide that the risk doesn't justify the cost of extra security. Politicians will blow a lot of hot air, lots of discussion will be held, and in the end nothing will be done.

 

[Kentak]

ID,

Let's discuss. If you are talking about an armed security officer, I'm not sure s/he would be all that effective against the type of desperate and determined school shooter who does at least minimal planning. The security would be the first logical target and probably not that hard to neutralize. It's not uncommon for officers and students to develop cordial relationships, to the point that the approach of the shooter with a concealed weapon would not be cause for alarm. Once the officer is neutralized, you're back to relying on off campus response.

However, if you're talking about multiple armed security who don't allow themselves to be together in the same location very often, that would be a more effective deterrent and response. From a security standpoint, the best situation might be multiple armed and trained school staff whose status is kept confidential. As such, they could not be specifically targeted and could respond quickly as needed. Is that what you had in mind?

K

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

There Is Only One Correct Fact

In the light of all those myths, even if any of those myths were to be fact, there is only one real reason these things happened. THERE WAS NO ARMED PERSON THERE TO STOP THE PERPETRATOR. Period.

Woody

It is way past time we in this country got back to arming ourselves the way our Founding Fathers so wisely saw fit to insure us the impunity to do so in the Constitution. B.E.Wood

 

[waynesan]

Volunteer Dads ???

I have often wondered in the last few years what the response would be if a request was issued by a local school board for volunteers to serve as armed security guards in local schools. Of course there should be training to make sure the volunteers know how to respond in emergency situations and have the tools to make that response effective.
I can't help but believe that many dads and granddads or even moms and grandmothers who have experience with weapons would be happy to volunteer and serve a day or two a month to make their schools safer.

Can you imagine what the media would do if something like this was tried?

 

[Lone_Gunman]

I don't think having grand dad half asleep leaning back in a chair with a gun on his belt with several hundred eight year olds running around him is necessarily the solution to this problem.

 

[ID_shooting]

Kentak,

Ideal security would be black jumpsuit wearing, M4 totin grunts in armor and K pots at each entrance before and after school and in pairs roaming the halls during class hours.

Since that will never happen, a few clandestin faculty members would be the next best.

Can we prevent homcide on school grounds? no, but I bet we can reduce it and most certainly make it much less tragic.

 

[Third_Rail]

Reduce it from a statistical improbability to what exactly?

 

[taliv]

Reduce it from a statistical improbability to what exactly?

that's exactly my point in the "is this a good letter to my school newspaper" thread.

if I were an anti-gun person, my argument would be that ONLY 12-20 homicides anually in 100,000 schools is exceptional evidence of the success of gun-free-zones policies. that compares to about 3 gun-homicides per 100,000 PEOPLE nationwide (2001). Even if the average school had only 100 students, that would mean gun free schools are many times safer than uncontrolled areas.

that's even more impressive if you assume (as many gun supporters do) that gun crime is mostly drug/gang-related and that those people are mostly high-school aged or slightly older, and spend roughly 8 hrs of their day in school.

of course, i'm not an anti-gun person and that argument is flawed, but it would still be persuasive to many.

 

[Dmack_901]

Armed guards is the wrong direction to look in. It is the same logic that supports martial law. It theorizes that a heavily armed soldier on every street would prevent crime.

Regardless of it's effectiveness, I don't think we really want that.

More effective methods of problem solving need to be implemented. Students need to feel that the administration will actually handle a problem, and the admin. actually has to do so.

And while it's a terribly unpopular position to take, in some rare cases, specific targets may deserve what comes to them. I'm sure we have all known people who without which the world would be a better place. And while shooting them is an extreme and in all liklihood unwarranted reaction, as the article says, most of the students have exhausted all of the non-violent reactions at their disposal, and the violent one does bring about change, the admin becomes more aware of problems, people think and therefore become sympathetic to "their cause"(like stop bullying people), and problematic people are no longer problems.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

How many attacks at airports have there been in the last 10 years? Why is there more security at the airport than my local high school?

Off hand, I'd say because it's hard to fly a school into a skyscraper.

Oddly enough, I have carried CCW in Tampa and Orlando airports, but am prevented to state law to CCW on school property.

Armed guards is the wrong direction to look in. It is the same logic that supports martial law. It theorizes that a heavily armed soldier on every street would prevent crime.

How about letting those with a CCW carry in school, especially teachers and the endless number of "administrators"?

 

[strambo]

Yes, #7 isn't really true. A professional armed presence will harden that school. In the Executive Protection field we call that "shifting the bullseye". They will pick a less hardened target like the scumbag who targeted that Amish school.

One of the instructors at the NRA LE instructor course I attended is a SWAT cop from Arizona. He said their school resource officers used to be the stereotypical fat, out of shape, don't want them on the street guys. Well, after an incident where the resource officer was useless...they made the resource officer a SWAT stud and rotated the duty. Now anyone thinking of trying something knows they got a real "meat eater" to deal with, not Barny Fife. It's a good break for the SWAT guys, they like it and the kids get a good, professional impression of Law Enforcement.

I don't want to see cops in every school...but if your gonna put one there, they need to be a stud, not a dud. Allowing teachers to CCW and sponsoring a training program for those interested would be much better. Have them "qualify" to be able to carry at school. Since they are employees, they can be held to higher standards as well as given greater responsibility.

 

[LAK]

I don't buy the claimed mental health percentages. An inordinately high number of school shooters have been on prescription psychotropics; like Ritalin etc. In these cases, the individual must have at some time been under the care of a psychiatric care professional. Unless they obtained the drugs from someone else.

--------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[Autolycus]

Originally Posted by HKmp5sd:

Off hand, I'd say because it's hard to fly a school into a skyscraper.

Ah but the terrorists waltzed right past security at the AIRPORT and commited their crimes off the ground on the plane itself.

Basically allowing CCW in the schools is probably one of the better solutions. It seems to work in Israel.

 

[Kentak]

Since that will never happen, a few clandestin faculty members would be the next best.

ID,

I agree with you. I suspect, though, that won't fly with the politicos or public. Instead, we'll probably see more metal detectors, security cameras, and armed security guards. All of which will be expensive and not greatly effective against the psycho-type shooter who is bent on maximum body count and ending with his own demise. I suppose it might help cut down on the more common gang-type violence.

K

 

[Erebus]

Well so far the Air Marshals and armed pilots seem to be working out just fine. I am assuming they(the marshals) are quite expensive as well. Arming school admins who wish to and putting plain clothed roaming guards may be a solution. Hijackings are pretty rare too but no one will argue that they are too rare to not require intense security.

The only solution is prevention via rapid responce. It's clear from the myths that prediction will likely never be possible unless kids who know things start talking before it happen.

 

[ApexinM3]

Armed, properly trained faculty is needed.

I agree with Erebus & the rest. Arming a select few school personel would be the ideal solution to the problem. They (the staff of a particular school) would know the the logistics of defending the turf (i.e. building layouts, student body, etc.) and therefore be able to respond quicker. It is much the same as CCW: the mere threat of responce is a deterent. Armed guards are visible, much like an officer on the street. The element of doubt might be enough to curb most shootings.

Metal detectors, cameras, and uniforms are a temporary solution to a permanent problem, IMHO. All they can be is a passive deterent. If & when the SHTF, a rapid & armed responce by those present will be the deciding factor.