Active Shooter Training

Active shooter training (sometimes termed active shooter response training or active shooter preparation) addresses the threat of an active shooter by providing awareness, preparation, prevention, and response methods.Federal Bureau of Investigation (2013) ''A study of Active Shooter Incidents in the United States Between 2000 and 2013.'' Washington Navy Yard, Washington, D.C. https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/active-shooter-study-2000-2013-1.pdf/view

Organizations such as businesses, places of worship or education, choose to sponsor active shooter training in light of a concern that as of 2013, 66.9% of active shooter incidents ended before police arrival in the United States. The Department of Justice says they remain "committed to assist training for better prevention, response, and recovery practices involving active shooter incidents" and they encourage training for civilians as well as first responders.

Although training is currently optional, businesses and organizations are beginning to face citations due to non-compliance with OSHA's guidelines regarding Workplace Violence.Occupational Safety and Health Administration (2017) ''Enforcement Procedures and Scheduling for Occupational Exposure to Workplace Violence (CPL-02-01-058).'' Washington, D.C. https://www.osha.gov/enforcement/directives/cpl-02-01-058Occupational Safety and Health Administration (2016). ''Guidelines for Preventing Workplace Violence for Healthcare and Social Service Workers (3148-06R)''. Washington, D.C. https://www.osha.gov/Publications/osha3148.pdf

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) further stresses that civilian training and exercises should include: ‘an understanding of the threats faced and also the risks and options available in active shooter incidents.

Legal/government requirements

In the United States, OSHA has made recommendations for businesses when it comes to active shooting and the workplace.Occupational Safety and Health Administration (1970) ''OSHA Act of 1970 General Duty Clause 5(a)(1) (29 USC 654)''. Washington, D.C. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/oshact/completeoshact Their guidelines within certain organizations also extend to building securities and facilities structures, as well as properly implemented active shooter preparation training. Lawmakers have also held organizations accountable for not having appropriate training or other protocols in place, citing OSHA's general duty clause. In 2017, the Department of Labor published the new "Enforcement Procedures and Scheduling for Occupational Exposure to Workplace Violence" which provides policy guidance and procedures to be followed when issuing citations related to workplace violence.

Given these changes, active shooter response training is quickly becoming a standard across America. Current active shooter training methods range from books to videos to multi-day on-site courses, but not all fall under OSHA's guidelines or judges approvals.

Types of training

Much analysis has been done on the techniques and methods of active shooters. In response to the data, some training programs include a focus on medical response for civilians, whereas other training programs place their attention on prevention, self defense, security of the building, escape during the event, psychology or physical escape. Common ideologies frequently taught are “Run/Hide/Fight” as put forth by the Department of Homeland Security, “Avoid, Deny, Defend” which was developed by the ALERRT center at Texas State University, "ALICE" which is an acronym for "Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate" offered by Navigate 360, and "STAAAT" or "Situational Threat Awareness, Assessment, and Action Training" developed by Security Advisors Consulting Group. There are differing viewpoints on the effectiveness of certain concepts, and the standards are constantly being updated with new data and methods.

Training for law enforcement

Many training programs focus on a particular group or groups of people. ALERRT (Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training) in conjunction with CRASE, and FLETC (Federal Law Enforcement Training Center) are examples of Federal- and State-level training, intended to help first responders and federal agents know how to respond to an active shooting. Other local agencies are also joining the fight and instituting their own form of training.

Training for organizations

Active shooter response training should not be confused with speech seminars, continuing education courses, or requesting a visit from local law enforcement. The FBI stresses the importance that training and exercises for citizens include an understanding of the threats faced and also the risks and options available in active shooter incidents. Private programs are available to organizations, businesses, schools (and more) which provide training in how to respond to or prepare for an active shooter.

Active shooter response training has become a service in demand given the increase in active shooting events in the United States, as well as to the continuing changes in laws, litigation, and OSHA requirements. There are few active shooter training programs available to the public, and not all agree on what are the correct methods for addressing the issue. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) urges everyone to receive proper training. TheFBI has stated:

Recognizing the increased active shooter threat and the swiftness with which active shooter incidents unfold, urstudy results support the importance of training and exercises— not only for law enforcement but also for citizens...even when law enforcement was present or able to respond within minutes, civilians often had to make life and death decisions, and therefore, should be engaged in training and discussions on decisions they may face.

Training and insurance

FBI study results reveal that as of 2013, 45.6% of incidents occurred in areas of commerce, including those open and closed to pedestrian traffic. The second-largest area for incidents was places of education at 24.4%. From 2013–2018, the trends have remained similar, with more events occurring at places of business. Demand for a new active shooter insurance has increased, with some policies now offering discounts to those organizations who have received prior and qualifying active shooter training. Some schools and organizations are already spending millions on active shooter insurance, as it is becoming a growing necessity.

Controversy

Risks vs. benefits

Those who plan training programs determine what should be conveyed in the drills, or if there should be drills at all.

In the United States, there has been some controversy over the effectiveness of active shooter training programs. Organizations disagree whether teaching youth to "fight" the active shooter (as referenced in the Department of Homeland Security "Run, Hide, Fight" directive) is dangerous or effective.West Virginia Education Association, 2019. Kanawha Students Receiving Controversial New Training To Counter School Shootings. Charleston, WV. https://www.wvea.org/content/kanawha-students-receiving-controversial-new-training-counter-school-shootings While the Department of Education does not recommend that students try to fight an active shooter, the FBI senior executive in charge of its active shooter initiative believes that fighting is often an unfortunate necessity and points out that individuals can at least train to fight.

After the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida in February 2018, it was suggested training programs can yield strategic information to potential shooters. Like most U.S. states, Florida requires schools to test their plans with drills. The shooter, a former student, may have been familiar with the school's drills and emergency plans regarding active shootings; some alleged that he used the information to increase total casualties. The school had received active shooter training before the actual shooting occurred, and the 2018 shooting in Parkland was the deadliest school place shooting in the United States since the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012.

There is a movement among national teacher organizations to end these drills. One such voice is the Massachusetts Teachers Association labor union. Merrie Najimy, the head of the MTA, said in 2020 that the drills are "scary" and "stressful" for students and that "lockdown is just a narrow and fear-based view of how to address a serious problem. It doesn't get at the root causes." It has been argued the drills and training programs are too traumatic for the students and that the training is more harmful—emotionally and mentally—than beneficial.

Effectiveness & qualifications

Other controversies arise over the effectiveness of certain programs or the qualifications and tactics used by those teaching them. For instance, some trainers focus solely on the training acronyms and directions, no matter the situation. Others deem this type of training as ineffective and are instead advocating for a scenario-based training protocol.

Some training programs are created by police, school resource officers, or SWAT, while others are created by current or former military, Special Operations, psychologists, Federal agents, or more. Some citizens and other professionals express concern that first responders do not have the appropriate credentials to direct an active shooter response training program for civilians.National Active Shooter Preparation and Recovery Administration. ''Certifying administration for Active Shooter Professionals''. https://NASPRA.org''Broward League of Cities and Engage One Broward. (June 4, 2018). ''The Broward County League of Cities’ School and Community Public Safety Task Force initial report and recommendations''. Broward County, FL. Retrieved from http://browardleague.org/wp-cnt/uploads/2018/06/ BLOC_PUBLICSAFETY_TASKFORCE_FINAL_RR_6_2_18_PM1.pdf. The expressed concern is that some first responders are not adequately trained in active shooting response strategies and either have not received, are currently receiving or only recently received their own training through the ALERRT (or like) program--thereby representing inadequate qualifications or experience to be training others. The FBI indicates that some officers and agents are under-experienced and under-educated in how to handle active shootings, even as a first responder. Broward County Sheriff's Office, for example, also received widespread criticism for their handling of the Stoneman Douglas school shooting as first responders. The public outcry was focused on the inadequacies of first responders in addressing active shootings at all.

Certifications (or lack of)

Until 2019, there were no regulating or certifying agencies for the qualifications of active shooter response training directors, trainers, or programs. There has been only one certifying organization--The National Active Shooter Preparation and Recovery Administration--which claims to hold active shooter training professionals to a certain standard. The industry of active shooter response training has gone and can continue to go unregulated, since certification is not mandatory. Eve
OSHA
with their citations, recommendations, and compliance requirements, does not mandate a certain set of prerequisites for active shooter training directors or trainers.

Lack of drill safety

Another area of public critique was seen when Indiana State Teachers Association expressed concern over the event in which their active shooter training from the ALICE program was incorporated with a drill that resulted in teachers being shot with pellet guns, execution style, and also left staff with welts and blood drawn. They have called for a focus on educator and student safety during these trainings and drills, and further requested mental health be added to the House Bill 1004.

Discrimination

Oher controversies stem from the actors used during mock drills and the ways in which the shooter (actor) was presented.{{Cite web, url=https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/18/us/pennsylvania-school-district-shooter-drill/index.html, title=School district pushes back against criticism over Arab stereotype in drill, first=Ray Sanchez , last=Hollie Silverman, website=CNN, access-date=2019-09-18 In one such incident, a particular nationality and religion was said to have been represented by utilizing certain skin color and costume on the actor playing the active shooter. Some felt this was discriminatory, while others responded that any correlation was unintentional and not meant to be used in a derogatory manor.

References

Self-defense