Can I ask what schools have already considered this exact plan? Or is different parts. Also I think mental health is a big part. Most times students attack or who intruders are mostly are ex students or students who didn’t have support and had a bad life that pushed them to these acts.

Initial Fronts - Capture if Possible:

• Objective: The focus here is on capturing suspects if feasible. This approach emphasizes the use of non-lethal methods and de-escalation techniques to minimize harm and potentially gather valuable intelligence.
• Importance: Prioritizing capture when possible aligns with the goal of preserving life and enabling legal processes. It also allows for the possibility of suspects surrendering peacefully.

Secondary Front - Assess and Neutralize:

• Objective: If suspects make it past the initial fronts, the next phase involves assessing the threat and neutralizing it if necessary. This phase can involve more immediate actions to protect civilians and secure the area.
• Importance: This phase serves as a contingency if initial efforts to capture are unsuccessful. It helps address ongoing threats while still considering the option of surrender.

Final Squadron - Eliminate if Necessary:

• Objective: The last phase involves eliminating the threat if all other options have failed and if the situation remains dire. This step is taken only if suspects do not surrender and continue to pose a significant risk.
• Importance: This approach ensures that lethal force is used as a last resort, preserving life wherever possible. It reflects a controlled escalation based on the threat level.

Honestly we shouldn’t even need to worry about this imo but I fully see what you mean. Though I will say I believe making sure security and safety is top priority. While any orange markers will be told put their hands up and then they will be swarmed in on and detained. Then the idea of doors and smoke and more allowing the professionals to engage and capture the target hopefully.

Though am I wrong to assume if someone is carrying a AR15 trying to kill our kids. Why should it matter if the target is eliminated or captured. Those are the future generations and innocents. While the first goal is capture and neutralize. When passing beyond the office. They will be eliminated unless they give up from psychological effects.

I think I understand. I went and discussed the mental health and environment side first and which is relatively cheaper but is also a huge part. Which in itself wouldn’t increase security but is a deterrent for original cause mostly.

Thank you for your feedback! You’re absolutely right that budget and the unpredictability of students are important factors to consider. The plan I’ve proposed envisions not just regular security guards, but specialized military personnel who would handle the more advanced aspects of security, while the local police focus on protecting staff and students in secure areas.

I understand the concerns about budget and practicality. This plan is meant as a comprehensive framework, which schools can adapt according to their resources. The key is to address major security weaknesses, even if the exact details of the proposal aren’t fully implemented.

Your points about communication and redundancy are crucial. Implementing clear communication protocols, code words, de-escalation techniques, and silent alarms are all essential elements that should be integrated into any security plan to ensure effectiveness and adaptability.

Does it look like a revolution is coming and if one had to happen if someone decimated the battlefield on the republican Trump side could they take presidency.

Technical stance for the people not Christian nationalist