Posted on 05/11/2019 1:07:17 PM PDT by DoodleBob
When someone opens fire at a school, should students intervene?
It's a question being raised after two shootings in which students lost their lives after choosing to take action. Kendrick Castillo, 18, died in Tuesday's shooting at STEM School Highlands Ranch outside Denver. He was shot and killed when he tackled one of the shooters, giving other students a chance to flee.
Last week 21-year-old University of North Carolina Charlotte student Riley Howell met the same fate when he knocked a campus shooter off his feet.
"When we're talking about school shooters, almost always, if anybody's going to get shot, it's the intervener. That's why we put police officers in Kevlar vests," says Frank Zimring, a professor of law and criminal justice studies at the University of California Berkeley.
In the Colorado and North Carolina shootings, Zimring says each intervention likely saved lives.
One of the Colorado students who charged the Highlands Ranch shooter along with Castillo said at a press conference he had "no hesitation" about jumping into action to try to thwart the attack. Zimring, who studies gun violence and mass shootings, says teenage "machismo or heroic ambition" likely played a role in that decision. And while that bravery is admirable, Zimring says intervention is always the least-preferable option.
"From an authority or risk-management standpoint, it is only when contacts with authorities who are armed and trained, or escape or hiding, is not possible, when it really becomes a situation where intervention might be necessary," he tells Here & Now's Peter O'Dowd.
(Excerpt) Read more at wbur.org ...
1. Wait for the police to rescue you.
2. Run away or hide.
3. Intervene (preferably with your firearm).
I support positive action, not fear or complacency.
I would hate to think a person would just sit in a chair and wait.
machismo and heroic ambition have perjerotive connotation, I really object.
How about desire to do the right thing, to be willing to risk sacrificing yourself to save others...
How about maybe they thought the shooter might just systematically kill everyone and they realized someone had to stop them.
Didn’t think to say that did they?
Soo...
How dare we interfere with their school shootings?!
Expletives deleted.
Except that if there isn't an intervener almost everyone is going to get shot.
We really are far far down the Orwellian language rabbit hole these days. By 'we' I mean 'they.'
By the author’s reasoning the passengers on UAL flight 93 should have stayed in their seats until the terror plot played out. Think how that would have changed the outcome.
Piss off, Frank.
Your precious officers in their Kevlar vest are minutes, if not tens of minutes away when these things happen - and all you can do is denigrate these kids with teenage "machismo or heroic ambition" likely played a role
That kind of thing takes thought but these kids were just reacting... reacting in a way that should make their families proud.
So Frank, STFU.
It is an important analogy.
I think that is why we are about to see an end to major school shootings.
A pattern of attacking the shooter immediately is emerging similar to what happen in Flight 93.
Aspirant thrill seeking killers will shift their mode to some other form of crime such as tylenol tampering etc. It will become to risky to pull out the gun at school.
1. Light your hair on fire.
2. Run in circles.
3. Piss your pants.
4. Tell the gunman that you're gonna report him/her/it to the principal.
What a stupid topic for conversation.
He’s a law professor. At Berkeley. You can’t expect him to say anything smart! ;)
Liberals always have a knee-jerk rejection of any conduct that even approaches virtuous.
Zimring is a pillow biter
Nobody knows how they themselves are going to re/act until the moment is on them.
Should Students Try To Thwart A Shooter?
As in all things, it depends on the relative intersectional superiority of the shooter and shootees.
Is the shooter a member of an oppressed class, such as People of color, gay questioning, or muslim? If so, they may be the real the victim, and should be afforded a clear shot.
Children shouldn’t be expected to “give their lives” because some idiotic assholes want to rule the word.
From those who say that a gun in the home makes one less safe...or that concealed carry leads to Wild West type shootouts...we should be past the point where we would uncritically accept the word of 'experts' on anything.
When seconds count, and 'help' is minutes away, you're all you got.
These interverners were young males who knew the reason God gave them that adrenalin and that testosterone.
To stop bad guys and save lives.
They should be praised, not sidelined for supposedly manifesting an unseemly desire to be a hero.
Everybody should thank God for boys like young Kendrick, who evidently knew how important it is to save lives, even at the cost of his own.
NO! Fight back. There is only one reason why the shooter’s there...to kill you. Might as well kill the POS.
Stupid question.
Without no other recourse, if they want to live, they had better do something because without it there is a near 100% chance it will not turn out well anyway.
How stupid are people really to even debate this subject?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.