RU Ready for R.U. Ready High?

[Jack 99]

Here's the story from usatoday.com, see if you can pick out the little oddity:

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

School trains police for next Columbine

MOYOCK, N.C. - At a mock, 16-room
school called R.U. Ready High, police
officers from around the country are
training for the next Columbine. They are
learning how to respond to school shooting
rampages by taking part in elaborate
simulations designed to assault their senses
and test their judgment under pressure.
About 1,000 law officers and military
personnel have trained there since its
opening in September.


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


Why is the military involved in any way shape or form in this? I'm not against the training, per se, but why would they have military personnel involved?

 

[Long Path]

Room-to-room fighting is very different from field excercises. Infantry often has to fight like this. Also, clearing rooms and getting people safely out seems to be more and more the mission that our military is getting into, what with Bosnia and the like.

As a High School thing, well, there are schools on bases around the world. But I don't necessarily think that this is so much a school-only thing, bur more of a room-to-room Hogan's Alley kind of thing. Good training, for infantry or police, neither of whom get much opportunity to train that way, in live fire. Too often, one has to train at ranges in which one has to observe the firing line as a safety issue, and, while safe, this teaches some BAD tactical thinking.

I really wish the cops at Columbine had been better trained. From what I understand, the cop on the scene retreated when he was fired upon, as he didn't possess the tactics to overcome the kids shooting at him. Very sad, for more than a few reasons...

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

www.apbnews.com has a better story

they have a search function.

Sounds like a hell of a good idea.

Solider of Fortune (oh well) had a recent article on Columbine and made several points:

1. Most training was based on time, talk and
tear gas for hostage situations and not
for engaging ongoing hot fire situations.
2. Intensive emphasis on clearing slowly doesn't work with this type of shooter who is
intent on killing. They discuss formations for safe and quick engagement till you get to the shooter.
3. They gently hint some folks didn't have the right stuff and perhaps weren't useful.

Other discussion of standard communications and command screwups.

After the fact rationalizations of behavior by participants will not be useful as compared to an analysis by outside and dispassionate experts.