Close Quarter Combat in our Schools

Close Quarter Combat

In the current discussion of Run, Hide, Fight (RHF) in schools, particular attention has been given to the "Fight" portion.  When it comes to having individuals close with and engage an enemy, this is the very definition of Close Quarters Combat (CQC).  There are many names this concept be called, but there is no denying that this meets the definition, "Hand-to-hand fighting at close quarters."

The RHF video has reportedly had nearly three million views, and has certainly spawned great discussion, and rightfully so.

The video, created by the City of Houston's Office of Homeland Security (Ready Houston) was not made with schools in mind, but for adults in the workplace who have the responsibility to make their own decisions about their safety.  These adults comprise an autonomous population who can decide how best to apply the RHF concepts.

Ready Houston wanted to make a catch phrase similar to "Stop, Drop and Roll" to help people remember what to do in the rare event a shooter attacks their workplace.  In that regard, they have been highly successful.  Their efforts have certainly raised awareness of Active Shooter Response for adults.  While I may disagree with parts of RHF, they are to be commended for raising awareness, and jump-starting a much needed discussion.

There are elements of RHF that are applicable to schools. However, schools and hospitals are comprised of largely non-autonomous populations that will be incapable, for various reasons, of making decisions about their safety.  Therefore those responsible must make these decisions.  There is a vast difference between an individual making a decision for themselves and a person making decisions that will affect a group.  The tactics a school, or hospital, chooses to use should reflect that difference.

I, nor anyone I have been professionally associated, have ever advocated that adults faced with a life-or-death situation of an Active Shooter in the classroom should go out like a lamb.  Where we differ from others is in how we instruct educators (Or hospital personnel) up to that point, and in how the school (or hospital) addresses the decision-point should CQC be needed.  

For example, police officers and military personnel receive tremendous amounts of training in CQC, and their leaders have the statutory authority to order them into harm's way.  Education personnel receive no such training, beyond a few hours in a workshop, and educational leaders have no statutory authority to order their teachers into danger.  In Indiana, the law allows teachers to "opt out" of administering life-saving injections to students.  While there is no case law concerning Active Shooter training, it is only a matter of time, and courts rely heavily on precedent.

Until such a time as the statutory authority is provided, schools should stress an All-Hazards approach to preventing, mitigating, and preparing to respond and recover from more likely events.  Such planning may include Active Shooter Incidents.  Planning should be unique for each district, and should not include "canned plans" that are the same for every school.

 
There should be a frank, honest, on-going discussion on how best to secure our schools.  That discussion needs to continue.