Monthly Terror Drills Now Required By Law For Students Including Kindergarten And 1st Graders
Posted by Alexander Higgins - September 13, 2011 at 7:33 pm - Permalink - Source via Alexander Higgins Blog
Loading ...- Tweet
- 0
Share
Email
- Tweet
-
Email
Share
Kindergarten and 1st grade students are now required by law to participate in monthly terrorism drills, including active shooter, bomb threat and evacuation drills.
I recently received my 1st grade students back to school paperwork. Going through the packet I found a letter serving notification that my son is now required by law to participate in monthly anti-terrorism drills.
In fact, after doing more research, I learned that all NJ schools which provide services to children from Kindergarten and up are now required by law to participate in monthly drills.
Schools must hold at least twice a year, in addition to the twice a month fire drills the following:
- Active shooter
- Evacuation (non- fire)
- Bomb threat
- and Lockdown
On top of those drills, schools will be required to also hold other security drills, which include the following:
- Shelter-in-place
- Reverse evacuation
- Evacuation to relocation site
- Testing of school’s notification system and procedures
- Testing of school’s communication system and procedures
- Tabletop exercise
- and Full scale exercise
With a Full Scale Exercise defined by Law as:
Full Scale Exercise: This is a multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional activity involving actual deployment of resources in a coordinated response as if a real incident had occurred. This exercise tests many components of one or more capabilities within emergency response and recovery, and is typically used to assess plans, procedures and coordinated response under crisis conditions.
The letter, which can be viewed here, reads as follows.
Brick Township Public Schools
101 Hendrickson Avenue
Brick, New Jersey 08724-2599
Telephone (732) 785-3000Office of the Superintendent
September, 2011
Dear Parent(s) or Guardian(s):
The safety and welfare of our students and staff are our highest priority. To provide schools with the opportunity to practice emergency response procedures, it is necessary to conduct security drills as well as fire drills. The NJ Department of Educations has recently changed the guidelines concerning the frequency of these emergency drills. Each month a school must conduct one fire drill and one security drill which may be a lockdown, bomb threat, evacuation, active shooter, or shelter-in place drill. All schools are now required by law to implement this procedure.
The school district is working closely with the Brick Township Police Department through our school resource officers to correctly implement these procedures. Our staff members have all be trained in our emergency drill procedures and are well prepared should we have to deal with a real emergency. The goals of the training drill are to improve our ability to protect students, save lives, and reduce injuries. They also allow us to evaluate our emergency operations plan and improve our response skills.
In order to protect students, in case of an actual emergency students will only be released to the parents and/or other adults listed on the emergency information sheet. Please be sure that this information is current and accurate. It is a good idea to have several trusted adults listed with the school.
This letter serves as notification that the Brick Township Public Schools will be conducting these drills in accordance with the NJ Department of Education Guidelines. The dates and times of the drills will not be announced. you would only be notified if there were a real emergency.
If you have any questions or need further information, please do not hesitate to call your child’s school office.
Sincerely,
Walter J Hrycenko
Superintendent of Schools
Past NJ Terrorism Drills Have Left Even Teacher Terrified – What Kind Of Trauma Will They Have On Children?
Here is a post on NJCSD describing a past drill:
NJ School Shooting Drill Terrifies Teachers
About 50 teachers at a New Jersey school experienced a terrifying moment when a shooting rampage turned out to be a drill, but the teachers didn’t know it.
It happened Aug. 28 at the Phillipsburg New Jersey Early Learning Center.
A man burst into the library and started shooting. But the gun didn’t have any bullets, just blanks.
Teachers took cover under child-sized tables, crying and trembling.
“People are crying. The girl next to me is trembling and shaking. You heard people crying. You heard other people praying. It was pretty dramatic,” one teacher said.
The school district put the drill in place to test staff readiness.
The Phillipsburg School Board heard from angry teachers and parents Monday night.
The board is reviewing the drill.
http://www.nbc10.com/news/17426916/detail.html
Test staff readiness… Unarmed teachers in a state where concealed carry isn’t allowed; they put an “active shooter” in the library and they weren’t sure what would happen? Panic, chaos, and terror are words that come to mind.
The NBC link above doesn’t work, but below is the story of another active shooter drill. In this drill, instead of using blanks, actual guns were modified to shoot bullets containing blood colored paint. The drill also included a certain number of volunteer students who knew the drills being conducted. These students were shot giving bystanders and participants the “feeling” similar to the real life scenario of actually being killed by the shooter.
Watch: CBS news reports from the scene of an active shooter drill being conducted
School shooting drill gets cops, kids on same page
ALBANY, Ore. – For students, fire drills and earthquake drills are simply the norm, but on Wednesday, in a sign of the times, students in Albany took part in a school shooting drill that was very intense.
This may have been only a drill, but it’s just about as real as it gets.
“Basically, the weaponry is the same weapon we carry on duty,” said Albany Police Sgt. Travis Giboney. “However, they use a marking cartridge: kind of like a paintball, except it’s a gas-driven paint pellet.”
Two counties’ worth of law enforcement, and a couple of dozen student volunteers, took part in this active shooter drill at West Albany High on Wednesday.
“It’s kind of scary at first,” says sophomore Matt Groshong. “You can even feel the gun when it goes off, and when it hits, when the bullets hit, it’s all so realistic, it’s just weird.”
There are many unknowns, but one thing’s for certain — there’s at least one shooter on a rampage.
As law enforcement heads into a situation, the kids who are playing the roles know what they’re doing, and the bad guys also know what’s going on. But these guys don’t know what to expect. In that sense, it’s the same feeling they’d have if they walked into an active shooter situation.
The bullets are replaced with paint, and the good guys always win, but the cops and the kids say they’re better prepared for the worst.
Source: CBS Local KVAL Channel 13
Do These Terrorism Drills Do More Harm Then Good?
Many high school students could be permanently embedded with the fear of that such an incident will eventually happen to them. As the CBS video of active shooter drill above shows, the number of casualties that occur are still extremely high. Perhaps, some high school students may find such a drill as “fun” but there will certainly be many who are traumatized with the thought that those who died during the “drill”, could have really been killed. For those who were killed during the “exercise” the effect would be even more devastating. Such drills will surely have an entirely different effect on kindergarteners and 1st graders.
Given the past shootings at Columbine and other schools and other terrorist attacks around the world, regardless of who conducted, I understand that the welfare and safety of my child, as well as other students is a major concern. However, as I pointed out above, I also fear that these new laws will leave an entire generation of children permanently traumatized. So we must ask the question, what are the benefits and negative consequences of such drills?
The will certainly go a long way in permanently creating a mentality of hatred toward our potential and would-be enemies. However, while these drills make it clear to our children they face a real possibility of becoming a casualty of such an attack, these type of drills appear to do nothing to actually mitigate or prevent such casualties. To the contrary, the drills instead seem to train our children to be helpless, cowering victims when faced with such a threat, which will do nothing to save their lives. While it can help police in their response times, such training can be conducted without the legal requirement that our children participate in such drills.
Furthermore, combined with other propaganda tools, such as the so-called 9/11 truth coloring book, it is almost certain that our children will be brainwashed and indoctrinated into hating Muslims, when in truth anyone from any faith could conduct such attacks. Instead, such drills create long lasting tensions that will take generations to undue, similar to manner that culture of deep seeded racism has persisted in our nation for so many years.
Personally, I feel there are better alternatives than this response. It would actually make more sense to have actually have police officers on patrol in our schools. That would actually save lives.
To the contrary, any would be terrorist planning to actually attack our schools will study these drills. They will study the trained response taken at schools. Then armed with the knowledge of the trained response, a terrorist would use that information to increase casualties and even plan an escape route knowing what the police response will be.
For example, in the event of an actual lockdown, students would become sitting ducks by sheltering in place and cowering under their desks. Instinctive tactics like flight and dispersion would probably serve them better than hiding beneath desks while a shooter walks by and picks them off through a window.
Terrorism drills train students to be sitting ducks for terrorists
A terrorist could also study the evacuation plan for a bomb threat and then place the bomb in the place were hundreds of students are planned to be evacuated to. Such crucial information and intelligence should be kept out of the hands of terrorists not provided to them.
Imagine if bank robbers could watch the police respond to a mock robbery of a local bank once a month. Studying such scenarios would give bank robbers valuable information on how to effectively perpetrate a robbery, while learning critical knowledge that would allow them to bypass the standard security measures and get away from the scene before the police could even respond. Does the same logic not apply when conducting terror drills at our schools, at the expense of the emotional and psychological well-being of our children?
Another dilemma exists with this type of approach as well. So many people are concentrated in other soft targets, such as our public transportation system, and there is no systematic response and approach to attacks on those targets, so why is it necessary to subject our children to such a system. Do we require all people who use busy train stations participate in such drills? What about those using bus terminals? Or airline passengers? The list really goes on and on and it would be infeasible if not impossible to implement such drills, training and response situations for all of the soft targets out there.
Read more: Five Problems with Active Shooter Lockdown Drills
How We Ended Up With Such Laws
A study titled, The Threat of Terrorism to U.S. Schools… Fact or Fiction?, the contents of which are presented in entirely below for those without a PDF capable device, gives an overview of the historical context that is being presented to law enforcement, school and legislative officials to justify the integration of such security drills into the public school systems.
The study cites terrorist attacks by Islamic extremists in Russia and Israel, which prominent eccentric speakers such as (Ret.) Army Lt. Col. Dave Grossman argues will happen in the United States sooner are later. Of course, the extremists who have launched these past attacks were trained by the United States and the CIA as part of covert operations.
In regards to the Grossman’s teachings, the Ashville Citizen-Times, a Gannett Newspaper, ran the following letter to the editor following the MSNBC’s special “Day of Destruction — Decade of War” which was ran repeatedly on 9/11 and went in-depth to Grossman’s teachings.
The nation can’t be terrified all of the time
I was disgusted and sickened watching MSNBC’s special “Day of Destruction — Decade of War,” hosted by Rachel Maddow and NBC chief foreign correspondent Richard Engle chronicling the changes made in America over the past 10 years following the surprise attacks of 9/11.
MSNBC profiled former Army Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, a “terrorism expert” speaking at military bases, police forces and public schools preaching fear and the need for domestic policing.
His tactics include armed guards at all school doors and arming our teachers to be ready for “commando-style” response to possible attacks.
Grossman is one of many lecturers speaking more than 300 days a year at $4,000 per “training lecture.”
Gun purchases in the U.S. have exploded over the past 10 years.
Handguns and automatic assault weapons are allegedly bought for protection, a trend I believe to be potentially more threatening than any “imagined” attack from an “imagined” terrorist.
What is the message?
“Be afraid, be very afraid.”
[...]
Source: The Ashville Citizen Times
Indeed, I watched the same special, chalking off the program as shedding a light on the “1984 Hate Week” style government propaganda.
Here is a clip from A day of destruction, A Decade of War, looking into Grossman’s teachings which are being pushed across the nation to public employees and being uses as the justification for the laws like we see in New Jersey, which subjects children as young as 5 years old to potentially traumatizing drills which present the possibility of living in the remainder of his school life deathly afraid bad men are going to show up at his school to murder and kill him and hundreds of his school mates.
To be fair, as stated above, here is the study which presents the historical context of the attacks in Israel and Russia which Grossman and other counter-terrorism experts are used to justify the drills and increase security in U.S public schools.
The Threat of Terrorism to U.S. Schools…Fact or Fiction?
By Lieutenant Michael D. Baray
Murrieta Police DepartmentCommand College Class 41
August 2007
This Command College Independent Study Project is a FUTURES study of a particular emerging issue in law enforcement. Its purpose is NOT to predict the future, but rather to project a number of possible scenarios for strategic planning consideration.
Defining the future differs from analyzing the past because the future has not yet happened. In this project, useful alternatives have been formulated systematically so that the planner can respond to a range of possible future environments.
Managing the future means influencing the future–creating it, constraining it, adapting to it. A futures study points the way.
The views and conclusions expressed in the Command College project are those of the author and are not necessarily those of the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST).
© Copyright 2007
California Commission on Peace Officer
Standards and TrainingThe Threat of Terrorism to U.S. Schools…..Fact or Fiction?
There are presently several professional speakers making their way throughout the California law enforcement training circuit professing the immediate threat Islamic terrorists pose to U.S. school children. Intense, high energy speakers like (Ret.) Army Lt. Col. Dave Grossman convey this message: not only is this threat possible, it is highly likely (Grossman 2006).
Police administrators attending these presentations are given graphic, detailed accounts of school related terrorist attacks in other counties, as well as the speaker’s belief this type of terrorism is likely to occur in the U.S. The attendees are often left with a dilemma of what now to do with this information. Do they take the word of this expert and dedicate the time and resources necessary to address a threat that has never before occurred in this county? Do they consider the information a source of intelligence and do nothing further, or do they fully investigate the validity of this issue, recognizing the potential this threat has for being the worst act of violence this country has ever seen?
This article will discuss previous school terrorism acts committed by Islamic extremists in Israel and Russia, as well as evidence supporting the likelihood of a similar act occurring in the United States. It will also explore the preparedness level of California law enforcement. The goal will be to provide the reader with a factual foundation on which he or she can intelligently assess and respond to this threat.
Historical View
For most Americans, terrorism became a reality on September 11, 2001. Prior to the World Trade Center bombing the thought of Islamic extremists killing thousands of Americans on U.S. soil seemed inconceivable. Even though at that time, and in previous decades, scores of terrorist acts were being committed in other countries, the majority of Americans naïvely didn’t think it could happen here. Terrorism was someone else’s problem.
The following case studies will outline the alarming trend of Islamic terrorist attacks in Russia, designed to capture large groups of hostages (1000+), lasting several days and ending with the murder of hundreds of victims, many of which are children. As well as the terrorist attacks in Israel targeting school and commuter buses transporting children. By looking at these violent acts against children we may better understand the vulnerabilities of our school children here in the United States.
Israel — The citizens of Israel have experienced the terror of Islamic extremists killing their children more than any other nation. They have been under a continuous fear of attack for more than thirty-years. From 1968 to 2004, Israel has had fifteen acts of terrorism committed against school children; killing 92 and injuring 281. Of the fifteen acts, ten were to school and commuter buses transporting students (Dorn p.37).
One of the most tragic and devastating terrorist acts in Israel was the Ma’alot school massacre in 1974, in which 21 Israeli children were murdered by Arab terrorists dressed as Israeli soldiers. As a result of this one incident, Israelis forever changed their way of life. Today, as well as for the past thirty-years Israel has had armed security forces in every school, armed guards on every field trip and sporting events, as well as armed security on buses (Grossman 2006).
After the 1974 Ma’ alot school massacre and Israel’s unprecedented police /military response at school sites, no successful terrorist acts against school children occurred until 1997, some 23 years later. Interestingly, during this same time, terrorist attacks in Israel caused 791 deaths according to the Israeli Foreign Ministry. It would appear Israel’s decision to make their schools hardened targets contributed to the terrorist’s decision not to attack schools for some 23 years.
In 1997, terrorist attacks targeting school children reemerged. The terrorists changed tactics, though, almost exclusively targeting school children traveling on school or commuter buses. Even though armed forces accompanied these buses, they still presented themselves an easier target than a fortified school. From March, 1997 to June, 2004, ten of the twelve recorded terrorist acts against school children involved school or commuter buses (Dorn p.38). Why exactly these Islamic extremists decided to re-launch the attack against children is unclear, but one reason could be the absolute feeling of fear, panic and helplessness this cowardly act causes a community.
Russia — Terrorist acts against school children are not exclusive to Israel. Russia has also suffered greatly from this type of terrorism. The September 1, 2004, massacre at Middle School No.1 in Beslan, North Ossetia, Russia, is the worst terrorist act against school children in world history. The three-day siege left 330 dead, including 172 children and 700 wounded. Russian Military Police Special Forces suffered a loss of 21 elite soldiers and 31 terrorists were killed in the battle for the school. This brutal and barbaric act of violence against children, women, and the elderly shocked the conscious of even most battled hardened soldiers and law enforcement officials (Giduck p.172).
According to Russian experts, the Beslan Siege was designed by the Chechen terrorists to last several days, to end with a high body count of mostly children, and receive world wide news media coverage. Once the terrorists gained control of the school there was nothing the Russian government could have done to prevent hostages from being killed. A quicker response by Special Forces may have saved more lives, but hostages were going to die. This type of terror and reality is something for which law enforcement in the United States is not prepared (Giduck p.174).
The Chechen terrorist responsible for Beslan also took credit for the 2002, Nord-Ost theater attack in Russia that left 129 hostages dead, of which many were children. These terrorists chose a theatrical production with a cast of many children. The Nord-Ost attack was the first Islamic terrorist act involving nearly 1000 hostages and many believe it was a harbinger for the siege at Beslan (Giduck pp. 83,171).
Although the attacks in Russia and Israel were all carried out by Islamic extremists, they differed greatly in their methodology. Both types of attack present specific tactical and logistical challenges that are new law enforcement agencies in California and the rest of the Country (Dorn p.39).
How valid is the threat?
The terrorist attacks in Russia committed by Chechen Muslim extremists should be of great interest to the United States. For decades, Chechens have been fighting side-by-side with the Taliban and al Qaeda combat veterans. They have been trained in al- Qaeda training camps, as well as by the United States and the CIA, during the 1990-Soviet-Afghanistan War. Additionally, during Operation Enduring Freedom in 2001 and 2002, Chechens were seen in Afghanistan helping the Taliban against American and Northern Alliance forces (Giduck pp. 54, 55).
According to a November 2004 U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency report, Osama Bin Laden had been actively involved in the terrorist insurgency in Chechnya since before the end of the first Chechen war (1991). The report also indicated Bin Laden was responsible for setting up several terrorist training camps in Chechnya. It is also known that two of Bin Laden personal bodyguards were Chechen. This information supports what Russia has always contended; that a link to al Qaeda has existed for years (Giduck pp. 57, 408).
During October and December of 2001, just months after 9-11, Osama Bin Laden gave statements to the Al- Jezeera News Network condemning the deaths of innocent Muslim children in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine and Chechnya, blaming the United States. He noted that Americans killed innocent children in Pakistan and mentioned the deliberate murder of one million Iraqi children, personally blaming President George H. Bush. Bin Laden stated it was permissible for Muslims to kill the innocent children of those that have done the same. He also reaffirmed his idea of striking the American economy by every means possible and mentions the slaughter of Muslim children in Chechnya one year before the Nord-Ost attack and three years before Beslan (Clarrey 2006).
On September 24, 2001, less than two weeks after the World Trade Center bombing, a Chechen resident was captured during a special anti-terrorism raid. The raid uncovered written plans for airplane strikes on the World Trade Center towers in his possession. The plan, which had the word Jihad written on the cover, outlined the seizing of the very commercial aircraft that had been used in the twin towers bombing (Giduck p.87).
During November 2004, FBI officials released information that a computer disc found in Iraq contained American school floor plans, photos and other information of six U.S. schools. This was the same week the U.S. Department of Education advised school leaders nationwide of the Beslan Siege. The downloaded data, found by U.S. military soldiers during a terrorist raid in July 2004, included a recommended crisis response report. The schools involved were in San Diego, Ca.; Fort Myers, Fla.; Jones County, Ga.; Birch Run, Mich.; and Franklinville and Rumson, both in New Jersey. U.S. government officials down played this information saying there was no real evidence of a specific threat to a school (MSNBC, 2004).
Another compelling source of evidence came from Lieutenant John Kost of the Sarasota County, Florida Sheriff’s Department. During a 2004 lecture titled “Inside the Terrorist Mind”; Lt. Kost explained his role with the Homeland Security Anti-Terrorism Task Force and disclosed how the Al-Qaeda terrorists responsible for 9-11, received their flight training in his jurisdiction. Lt. Kost was involved in hundreds of post 9-11 follow-up interviews concerning the involved terrorists, as well as having knowledge of the interrogations of at least twenty suspected Al-Qaeda terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Lt. Kost said a common thread between the prisoners when they were separately interrogated was their admission of a plan to attack our schools and children. He further explained this plan consisted of simultaneously attacking 8-12 soft targets, including schools throughout the United States (Kost 2004). This information has not gone unnoticed by the Department of Homeland Security, which released three alerts regarding school buses and the possible heightened states of danger. Additionally, Federal agencies like the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the National Association of Pupil Transportation (NAPT) began focusing on the possibility of school bus terrorism as early as 2001. The lack of state or federal mandates requiring adequate training, however, has resulted in a disjointed effort across the country. California was one of only six states that either released a training video or implemented a training program for school bus drivers on terrorism preparedness (C. Dorn 2005). Although this is a positive step, much remains to be done.
Preparedness level
To prepare for a situation like Beslan, law enforcement would need to thoroughly understand the mindset, capabilities and intentions of the terrorists behind these attacks. During the Nord-Ost Theater assault, Russian Special Forces deployed a gas into the theater, rendering all the terrorists and hostages unconscious. The soldiers then entered the building and shot every suspected terrorist in the head while they appeared to be sleeping. This tactic was used because of the possibility of suspects being wired with explosives (suicide bombers) (Giduck p. 82). Is this something that U.S. law enforcement is prepared to do, either tactically or psychologically?
Law Enforcement Survey - Patrol Level Terrorism Training Response Percentage
Law Enforcement Survey – of Agencies that recieved Patrol Level Training Incident Percent of Patrolmen Trained Active Shooter Training (Post Columbine) 100% Terrorist Attack to a School 72% Terrorist Siege (Take over) of a School 9% Terrorist Attack to a School Bus 0% Table 1-1
A survey conducted by the author of more than fifty law enforcement agencies, representing various size departments throughout California, reported that over 70 % received patrol level training to address a terrorist attack to a school. However, less that 10% of the agencies surveyed reported receiving training to address a terrorist siege (take-over) of a school. And none of the surveyed agencies reported receiving patrol level training to address a terrorist attack to a school bus. Even though school bus attacks have previously occurred in this country, the threat of Islamic terrorists targeting children on school buses, appears is being overlooked (Baray 2006).
Interestingly, the 70 % of the surveyed agencies reported receiving training to address a terrorist attack to a school were referring to “active shooter” training they received in response to the 1999 Columbine High School shooting in Littleton, Colorado. Although this response may seem applicable for terrorist assaults, more in-depth training would be required to adequately prepare law enforcement officers to respond to a Beslan Siege type assault (Giduck p.82).
Awareness
Local law enforcement agencies will be held accountable by their citizenry if children become the target of terrorism. Days after the Beslan Siege, Russian President Vladimir Putin addressed his nation and admitted Russian law enforcement’s “Failure to recognize the complexity and danger of processes going on in our country and the world as a whole,” and “to react to them adequately.” We should not overlook this rare public criticism by President Putin, who described perfectly what they failed to do. They were not aware of the threat surrounding them, which is the same threat now surrounding the U.S. (Giduck p.233).
Extending on the findings of school threat awareness in California, it appears the majority of law enforcement agencies in this country are not aware of the seriousness of the issue. Although many police departments have trained to respond to a threat of suspects who are immediately causing death and serious injury to others, it does not directly address the barbaric nature of the large-scale terrorist attack on our children (Giduck p. 174, Grossman 2006).
The complexity of this issue is far more reaching than just the tactical concerns. To effectively prepare and respond to this threat, police chiefs and their executive staff would first have to be made aware of the issue in its entirety, determine its level of priority and commit to a course of action. The most critical areas that should be considered when developing a strategic plan to address this issue are as follows:
- The development of a police department employees to be the agencies subject matter experts regarding school terrorism (Terrorist Liaison Officer)
- Collaborative partnership with the school district and community stakeholders
- A successful school resource officer (SRO) program
- A comprehensive prevention and emergency response plan
- Anti-terrorism tactical training for patrol level and SWAT personnel.
Training Available
The Orange County, California Sheriff’s Department has developed a training course to address many of these concerns. The 40-hour course, titled “Terrorism Liaison Officers: Role in School / Community Networking” outlines the terrorism threats in this country, the importance of effective community partnerships and strategies, and the development of a comprehensive prevention and response plan for a variety of potential threats (Dyball 2007). Also addressed during the 40 hour course was the importance of the school resource officer (SRO) in establishing the needed partnership between the school district and police department, as well as being the first line of defense. This message was also conveyed during a 2004 Execute Management Symposium on Community & School Safety in Palm Springs, California, by (Ret.) Lt. Col. Dave Grossman.
During Mr. Grossman’s lecture, titled “The Real Threat of Terrorism to our Schools,” he explained the threat our country is facing, and the importance of the SRO position. Grossman posed the question to the audience, “If our children are this countries most precious asset, then why don’t we have are best officers protecting them?” The audience of mostly police managers agreed that the SRO position was not being viewed in this manner and in several police agencies the position was viewed as an undesirable assignment that needed to be filed by inverse seniority. The point was made if our school children became the victim of terrorism, the view of the SRO position would change. Grossman suggested having SWAT officers as SRO’s, and attaching a sense of honor and duty to their assignment (Grossman 2004, Dyball 2007).
The development of a comprehensive plan by school officials and law enforcement preparing communities for all emergencies and disasters, including a terrorist attack to a school will require partnerships between the police department and school district at all levels. A result of this collaboration would be law enforcement working with schools, conducting tactical site surveys, giving recommendations on the placement of school surveillance camera systems and providing schools training for lock down and evacuation drills.
The aforementioned TLO training course devoted several hours to this topic and recommended the all hazards approach plan to safe school planning be utilized. The
Book “Jane’s Safe Schools Planning Guide for All Hazards” (www.janes.com) was used as a reference guide. This book supports the concepts outlined in the 2003 U.S. Department of Educations most comprehensive guide titled; Practical Information on Crisis planning: a Guide for Schools and Communities (http://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/safety/crisisplanning.html) and provides much greater depth and detail, while fully addressing the four phases of emergency management: Mitigation/prevention, Preparedness, Response and Recovery (Dorn p.85).
The TLO would also be responsible to share this information with key stakeholders in the community, such as the school district, school transportation department, parent / teacher association (PTA), city manager, elected city council members, community groups, and elected school district board members. This would be a new role for most law enforcement agencies. The purpose would be to share the information and establish on going partnerships with open lines of communication.
As for law enforcement agencies receiving the needed tactical training to address this issue, this is an obstacle yet to overcome. Currently, there is not a POST (Police Officers Standard and Training) certified anti-terrorism tactical training course available. This was recently addressed at the Second Annual Los Angeles Joint Regional Intelligence Conference on April 12-13 of this year. Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca acknowledged this issue, announcing the approval of a new law enforcement anti-terrorism police training academy, which will be built at the former Los Alamitos Army Reserve Base in Orange Country, California. The anticipated completion date was not disclosed (Baca 2007). In the meantime, law enforcement will need to seek alternative training sources. One option is the use of “Archangel Group”, a non profit anti-terrorism consulting/training organization that works directly with United States law enforcement, military, and government agencies (www.antiterrorconsultants.org).
The Murrieta Experience
The implementation of a strategic plan as discussed in this article is an ongoing endeavor. The Murrieta Police Department in Riverside County CA committed to this effort in 2004. Although much progress has been made, there is still much work to be done. The previously mentioned lecture by (Ret.) Lt. Col. Dave Grossman was a starting point in this decision process. Once a commitment was made by the chief of police to make this issue a priority the following changes and ideas were implemented:
The agency first changed the perception of the SRO position, adopting the philosophy of Grossman, by attaching a sense of honor and duty to the assignment. The SRO’s have been re-assigned from Patrol to Investigations and now work closely with the gang and street-level drug detectives. The new SRO concept and commitment was then shared with the Murrieta Valley Unified School District. The Police Department provided training to School administrators on drugs, gangs and other related topics and conveyed Grossman’s message. The response by school administrators and educators was outstanding, monthly meeting were established by a new task force known as G.R.I.P. (Gang, Risk, Intervention and Prevention). The task force includes school administrators, educators, campus supervisors, SRO’s, police sergeants and a lieutenant.
Another example of this collaboration is a “Home to School” program. This program, which is an extension of the police volunteer system, uses members of the PTA (Parent teacher association), who have cleared a police background check to monitor the surrounding streets of schools sites. Armed with a cell phone and a notepad, their mission is to watch for anyone or anything suspicious, as children walk to and from school. The program, which has been operational for the past two years, was started in response to the attempted abduction of a child near a school. This program is an excellent resource for law enforcement to gather information of suspicious activity near schools.
Murrieta PD has also worked closely with the school district conducting site surveys and the placement of new digital surveillance cameras. Several high quality cameras have been strategically placed on school property, near major intersections to record the license plates of vehicles. The police department is able to access these images via the internet at anytime.
Another effort that is in progress, is the installation of a direct 911 phone lines from school sites to the Police Dispatch Center that can be activated by strategically placed panic alarm buttons. In theory, once the button is activated, an immediate 911 call is placed from the school. The Dispatch Center will then receive the call with a pre-recorded message advising of an active shooter incident. Also, a pre-determined text message will appear on the dispatchers monitor screen indicating the emergency and listing contact persons and cell phone numbers. The use of this system will reduce confusion and ensure immediate contact and response by the police department.
Although much has been accomplished towards implementing a strategic plan, there are still several challenges to be addressed. The process has been time consuming and a learning experience for all involved. We are planning a tactical training class for line level police officers to execute the response plans that are practiced by police and school administrators.
Conclusion
This article has examined the horrific terrorist acts committed against school children in Russia and Israel, evidence supporting the likelihood of such acts occurring in the U.S., and the preparedness level of law enforcement to address this issue. One community in California, like many others, has been working to prepare for the unthinkable. The foundation of facts to assess the potential threat is one that should compel any police executive to come to a similar conclusion. Given this information, the question remains: what now should a police administrator do with this information?
It should be clear there is no quick fix, three-day seminar, or book that can be bought and put on a shelf to prepare a police agency for this threat. It will take time, resources, dedication and a shared vision by the entire community to appropriately address this issue. However, once a police administrator is made aware of this threat in its entirety, is there really any other responsible option other than to understand the issue, recognize its potential and prepare for the unthinkable?
References
Callery, J. (2006), examining the prospect of terror attacks on schools in America:Another shocking September morning. Retrieved October 31, 2006. from http://www.killology.com/prospect_of_terror.htm.
Dorn, C. ( May 2005), School bus terrorism: a practical analysis with implications for
America’s schools. Retrieved September 28, 2006, from http://www.safehavensinternational.org/schoolBusTerrorism.php
Dorn, M., & Dorn, C. (2005). Innocent targets- when terrorism comes to school.
Canada: Safe Haven International.
Giduck, J. (2005). Terror at Beslan. United States: Archangel Group Inc.
Grossman, D. ( 2006, October) U.S. Army (Ret) Lt. Col. Dave Grossman presents:
School terrorism trends and violence in our schools. Lecture presented at the Cornerstone Christian Church, Wildomar, CA.
Kost, J. (2004, December) Inside the terrorist mind- the “Perfect Day.” Lecture presented
at a symposium of community and school safety, Palm Springs, CA.
NSNBC, (October 8, 2004). Schools warned after plans found in Iraq.
Retrieved November 15, 2006, from http://www.msn.com/id/6199027/
Grossman, D. (2004, December) The Real Threat of Terrorism to our Schools. Lecture
presented at a symposium of community and school safety , Palm Springs, CA.
Baca, L. (2007, April) Opening remarks by Sheriff Lee Baca and Chief Bratton at law
enforcement intelligence conference. Lecture presented at JRIC 2007 Intelligence Conference. USC, Los Angeles, CA.
Dyball, S. (2007, March) Terrorism Liaison Officers: Role in School / Community
Networking. Lecture presented at 40 hour, POST course, Orange, Ca.
Trifkovic, S. (2002), The Sword of the Prophet: Islam History, Theology, Impact on the
World. Boston, MA. Regina Orthodox Press, Inc.
A Deeper Look Into Laws Requiring The Terrorism Drills
The New Jersey has issued the following FAQ about the security drills.
School Security Drill Law N.J.S. 18A:41-1
FAQs
Q- What are School Security drills?
A- School Security drills are an exercise, other than a fire drill, to practice procedures that respond to an emergency situation including, but not limited to, a non-fire evacuation, lockdown, or active shooter situation and that is similar in duration to a fire drill.
Q- How many drills are required per academic year?
A- As of November 1, 2010, every school is required to hold at least one fire drill and one school security drill each month within the school hours, including any summer months during which the school is open for instructional programs.
Q- What types of drills are required?
A- During the academic year schools are required to hold a minimum of two of each of the
following security drills:
- Active shooter
- Evacuation (non- fire)
- Bomb threat
- and Lockdown
Q- What other types of school security drills can be held?
A- The following are examples of other security drills that schools can hold:
- Shelter-in-place
- Reverse evacuation
- Evacuation to relocation site
- Testing of school’s notification system and procedures
- Testing of school’s communication system and procedures
- Tabletop exercise
- and Full scale exercise
Q- When are school security drills required to be conducted?
A- As of November 1, 2010, every school is required to hold monthly school security drill within the school hours, including any summer months during which the school is open for instructional programs.
Per Chapter 4 of the New Jersey Fire Code; 408.3.1 First emergency evacuation drill. The first emergency evacuation drills of each school year shall be conducted within 10 days of the beginning of classes.
As of September 2011, schools are required to conduct a school security drill within the first 15 days of the beginning of the school year.
Q- Who is required to participate in school security drills?
A- All building occupants are required to participate in drills. However, two (2) of the eight (8) mandatory drills do not have to include students.
Q- How long should a school security drill take?
A- A school security drill is similar in duration to a fire drill.
Q- If a school has an incident occur which results in a school security response will it be considered a school security drill?
A- Responses made necessary by the unplanned activation of emergency procedures or by any other emergency shall not be substituted for a required school security drill.
Q- Who should be notified as to when a school security drill will be held?
A- Schools will provide emergency responders with a friendly notification at least 48 hours prior to holding a security drill. Emergency responders are not required to observe security drills, however, it is encouraged that schools invite emergency responders to attend and observe at least four different security drills annually.
Q- What type of school security drill records should the school/district keep and submit?
A- Districts are required to annually submit the “Security Drill Statement of Assurance” provided by the Department of Education to their county office of education by June 30 of each year. The county office shall forward an information copy to the respective county prosecutor’s office. The “Security Drill Record Form” provided by the Department of Education shall be completed by all schools and retained at the district level.
Q- What is the difference between an active shooter drill, lockdown drill and sheltering-in-place?
A- Active Shooter: An Active Shooter or armed assault on school grounds involves one or more individuals’ intent on causing physical harm to students and staff. Intruders may possess “weapons” which include but are not limited to: gun(s); assault rifle(s); explosives(s); knife(s) including all other edged weapons; or other harmful devices. In an active shooter situation one or more subjects who are believed to be armed/has used/has threatened to use a weapon to inflict series bodily injury or death on other person(s) and/or continues to do so while having unrestricted access to additional victims; their prior actions have demonstrated their intent to continuously harm others; and, their overriding objective appears to be that of mass injury and murder.
Lockdown: A lockdown involves occupants of a school building being directed to remain confined to a room or area within a building with specific procedures to follow, such as locking doors, closing or opening windows and shades and, seeking cover. A lockdown may be the appropriate response when a dangerous person(s) is believed to be on or near the premises and school administrators are taking these measures to minimize risk that the occupants will be exposed to danger. Lockdowns necessitate a law enforcement response and immediate intervention.
Sheltering-in-place: Sheltering-in-place is similar to a lockdown in that the occupants are to remain on the premises; however, occupants may be moved to another part of the building to minimize risk of exposure to a dangerous event taking place outside of the building. For example, if there is a release of a chemical cloud from a nearby plant, to evacuate the occupants may put them at greater risk then sheltering them within the building.
Q- What is the difference between a bomb threat drill and a non-fire evacuation drill?
A- Bomb Threat: The primary concern in a bomb threat situation is the safety of the building occupants. The school administrator (SA) plays a major role in responding to bomb threats. It is the responsibility of the SA to order an evacuation, if the bomb threat is deemed credible and reasonable. If reasonable cause does not exist, the SA should immediately consult with law enforcement about ordering an evacuation or lockdown of a school building. The SA has three options when faced with a bomb threat, the SA can: 1) assess and decide that the threat is not credible, 2) evacuate or lockdown the building immediately, or 3) search and evacuate the affected area. When a school has been evacuated and a device has not been found, it is the responsibility of the SA to order the re-occupancy of the school, based upon the information provided by law enforcement officials.
It remains the responsibility of law enforcement to take each of these threats seriously, respond to the scene when called, assist in evacuating the school building (if necessary), conduct thorough investigations, coordinate the search of the building, and advise the SA of the findings of the search and status of the bomb threat.
Evacuation: The need for orderly and safe evacuation during certain situations is critical to the safety of the occupants of a school building. A variety of situations may require evacuation ranging from natural events (i.e. flooding) to man-made situations (i.e. bomb threats, loss of power, gas leaks). All of these events pose a danger to the building occupants.
It is the responsibility of the school administrator to order an evacuation, if the threat is deemed immediate, credible and reasonable. School administrators must also notify emergency responders so that they are aware of the situation and may take appropriate action. If reasonable cause does not exist, school administrators should consult with law enforcement and emergency responders about ordering an evacuation of a school building. If law enforcement identifies any situation that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the occupants are exposed to a significant risk or the threats are reasonably confirmed, law enforcement shall order an evacuation.
Regardless of the underlying cause that necessitates the evacuation, it is the responsibility of law enforcement and other emergency services to respond and to assist in the orderly and safe evacuation of a school building when the need arises. Once an evacuation occurs, law enforcement has the responsibility of advising school administrators of the extent of their specific efforts, their finding and when their efforts are concluded. After considering the information supplied to them by law enforcement, the final decision to reoccupy the facility rests with the school administrator.
Q- When can the fire alarm be use as an evacuation notification?
A- Fire alarm systems shall be initiated only during a fire evacuation or fire drill.
Q- Are child care facilities required to conduct school security drills?
A- Schools that provide an accredited Kindergarten class or higher grade are required to meet the
mandates of NJS 18A:41-1.Q- Is it required that school keep all doors and exits of their respective rooms and buildings unlocked?
A- New Jersey Statute 18A:41-1 states, “… shall require all teachers of all schools, whether occupying buildings of one or more stories, to keep all doors and exits of their respective rooms and buildings unlocked during the school hours, except during an emergency lockdown or an emergency lockdown drill…”
The law requires that doors can be opened from the interior of a room or building in case of emergency egress. Doors may be locked as long as someone can exit in an emergency.
Q- Who should receive school security drill training?
A- Per N.J.S. 18A:41-7.2 , all staff members in the district or nonpublic school shall be provided with training on school safety and security that includes instruction on school security drills. Each staff member shall be provided with the training by November 2011 or within 60 days of the effective date of employment.
Per N.J.A.C. 6A:16-5.1(d), The district board of education shall develop and provide an annual in-service training program for all district board of education employees to enable them to recognize and appropriately respond to safety and security concerns, emergencies and crises.
The New Jersey Department of Eduction has also issued the following security drill guide.
NJ Dep of Eductation Security Drill Guide Header
School Security Drill Guide
N.J.S.18A:41-1 Fire, school security drills This document provides State guidance relating to school security drills pursuant to 18A:41-1. Security drills, which are similar in duration to a fire drill, will be used to practice schools’ procedures for responding to emergencies as outlined in the School Administrator Procedures: Responding to Critical Incidents document that the Department of Education disseminated in October 2007. Schools will coordinate with local emergency responders by updating safety and security plans and procedures for drilling, managing and responding to school emergencies.
pursuant to C.App.A:9-86DEFINITONS
School Security Drill: An exercise, other than a fire drill, to practice procedures that respond to an emergency situation including, but not limited to, a non-fire evacuation, lockdown, or active shooter situation and that is similar in duration to a fire drill.
Tabletop Activity: This activity involves key personnel discussing simulated scenarios in an informal setting. Tabletops can be used to assess plans, policies, and procedures.
Full Scale Exercise: This is a multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional activity involving actual deployment of resources in a coordinated response as if a real incident had occurred. This exercise tests many components of one or more capabilities within emergency response and recovery, and is typically used to assess plans, procedures and coordinated response under crisis conditions.
DRILLS
Fire, school security drills
18A:41-1
Every principal of a school of two or more rooms, or of a school of one room, when located above the first story of a building, shall have at least one fire drill and one school security drill each month within the school hours, including any summer months during which the school is open for instructional programs, and shall require all teachers of all schools, whether occupying buildings of one or more stories, to keep all doors and exits of their respective rooms and buildings unlocked during the school hours, except during an emergency lockdown or an emergency lockdown drill. Where school buildings have been provided with fire escapes, they shall be used by a part or all of the pupils performing every fire drill.
Schools are required to conduct a school security drill within the first 15 days of the
beginning of the school year.Schools are required to hold a minimum of two of each of the following security drills annually:
- Active shooter;
- Evacuation (non- fire);
- Bomb threat;
- Lockdown.
Examples of other types of security drills:
- Shelter-in-place;
- Reverse evacuation;
- Evacuation to relocation site;
- Testing of school’s notification system and procedures;
- Testing of school’s communication system and procedures;
- Tabletop exercise;
- Full scale exercise.
Initiation
Fire alarm systems shall be initiated only during a fire drill evacuation.
Unplanned incident
Responses made necessary by the unplanned activation of emergency procedures or by any other emergency shall not be substituted for a required school security drill.
Notification
Schools will provide emergency responders with a friendly notification at least 48 hours prior to holding a security drill. Emergency responders are not required to observe security drills, however, it is encouraged that schools invite emergency responders to attend and observe at least four different security drills annually.
Record Keeping
Districts are required to annually submit the “Security Drill Statement of Assurance” provided by the Department of Education to their county office of education by June 30 of each year. The county office shall forward an information copy to the respective county prosecutor’s office. The “Security Drill Record Form” provided by the Department of Education shall be completed by all schools and retained at the district level. The following information is required:
- Date and time;
- Type (specify what was drilled);
- Duration;
- Weather conditions;
- Participants (i.e. students, staff, faculty, law enforcement, fire);
- Brief description of what occurred and procedures followed.
TRAINING
Provision of training on school safety, security
18A:41-7.2A local board of education and chief school administrator of a nonpublic school shall ensure that all full-time teaching staff members in the district or nonpublic school are provided with training on school safety and security that includes instruction on school security drills. Each teaching staff member shall be provided with the training within one year of the effective date of this act or within 60 days of the commencement of that staff member’s employment, whichever date is later.
Development, dissemination of building security drill guide, training materials
App.A:9-86.3(a)
The Director of the Office of Homeland Security and Preparedness shall, in consultation with the Commissioner of Education, the Director of the Division of Fire Safety in the Department of Community Affairs, the Director of the State Office of Emergency Management in the Division of State Police in the Department of Law and Public Safety, and the Attorney General, develop and disseminate to each school district and nonpublic school a building security drill guide and training materials that educate school employees on proper evacuation and lockdown procedures in a variety of emergency situations on school grounds including, but not limited to, bomb threats and active shooter situations.
Employee training on school safety and security plans
6A:16-5.1(d)
The district board of education shall develop and provide an in-service training program for all district board of education employees to enable them to recognize and appropriately respond to safety and security concerns, including emergencies and crises, consistent with the district board of education’s plans, procedures and mechanisms for school safety and security and the provisions of this section.
1. New district board of education employees shall receive the in-service training, as appropriate, within 60 days of the effective date of their employment.
2. The in-service training program for all district board of education employees shall be reviewed annually and updated, as appropriate.
Employee Training
A training CD Rom, Critical Incident Response: Procedures for School Administrators, Faculty and Staff, was developed by the Office of Homeland Security & Preparedness in collaboration with the Department of Education to enhance regional and local training for school personnel on procedures to follow during an emergency. This resource was distributed to all schools during the summer of 2009 and fulfills the training requirement of this statute
Readers who viewed this page, also viewed:
Ongoing Scandal – Obama Lying About Japan Nuclear Radiation In US
Police Severely Beat Man Half To Death For Bicycling Without Headlight
Financial Terrorism in America: Over 1 Million Deaths Annually, 62 Million People With Zero Net Worth, As the Economic Elite Make Off With $46 Trillion
France’s CEREA – US Cesium Contamination Levels Exponentially Higher Than Parts Of Japan
Watch Simulation Of 3 Million Gallons Of Dumped Radioactive Seawater Spread Through Pacific OceanRelated Posts
- Amid Charges Of Abuse Of Power FBI Chief’s Job Extended In Violation Of 10 Year Term Limit
- Oslo Terror Attacks Being Used To Justify Sinister Cyber Surveillance Programs
- 9/11 ANALYSIS: 9/11 and America’s Secret Terror Campaign
- Financial Terrorism in America: Over 1 Million Deaths Annually, 62 Million People With Zero Net Worth, As the Economic Elite Make Off With $46 Trillion
- CIA Using Local Police, NYPD, To Illegally Spy On American Citizens
- Report: 1 in 3 Pakistan Drone Strikes and 1in 7 of all CIA Drone Strikes Kills a Child
- Graphic 9/11 Coloring Book Teaching Kids ‘Truth’ About Terrorism Full Of Lies And Propaganda
- Martial Law: Corporate Media Hints At Military Plans To Take On The American People During Domestic Civil Unrest
- Afghanistan And Iraq Troop Withdrawal Deadlines To Be Extended, Again, Possibly Until 2024
- America IS A Police State – The Handling Of Deadly Police Brutality Cases Proves It
- War Inc — Inside The Pentagon’s Psychological Operation To Suck The Masses Into The War Machine
- Feds ‘Islam 101′ Guide Depicted Muslims as 7th-Century Simpletons
- 9/11 Compensation Fund Won’t Cover Cancer Costs After Feds Covered Up Carcinogens In Ground Zero Air
- Media Still Blames Al-Qaeda For Oslo Knowing Pro-Isreali Extremists Conducted Terror Attacks
- Federal officials are circulating to all 18,000 U.S. law enforcement agencies a… civil rights video??!!
- Pentagon Deploying 20,000 Troops Within The United States To Prepare For Civil Unrest In Event Of Economic Collapse
Post Navigation:
============================================================
Past NJ Terrorism Drills Have Left Even Teacher Terrified – What Kind Of Trauma Will They Have On Children?
Here is a post on NJCSD describing a past drill:
NJ School Shooting Drill Terrifies Teachers
About 50 teachers at a New Jersey school experienced a terrifying moment when a shooting rampage turned out to be a drill, but the teachers didn’t know it.
It happened Aug. 28 at the Phillipsburg New Jersey Early Learning Center.
A man burst into the library and started shooting. But the gun didn’t have any bullets, just blanks.
Teachers took cover under child-sized tables, crying and trembling.
“People are crying. The girl next to me is trembling and shaking. You heard people crying.
You heard other people praying. It was pretty dramatic,” one teacher said.
The school district put the drill in place to test staff readiness.
The Phillipsburg School Board heard from angry teachers and parents Monday night.
The board is reviewing the drill.
No comments:
Post a Comment