A teacher who calmly asked a 14-year-old boy who twice burst into his classroom brandishing a .22-caliber revolver "What can I do, and how can I help you?" is credited with averting potential bloodshed at Hastings Middle School on Monday morning.
At 10:30 a.m. Monday he had just begun his fourth-hour Earth Science lesson when the terror began.
"I had just finished taking attendance and just introducing the lesson and activities that we were going to be doing for the day. ... My classroom door was open," Rapatz said. A student who was supposed to be in Rapatz's class at that hour entered -- with a drawn pistol.
"It didn't seem like he was pointing it at any particular student, he was kind of moving it around," Rapatz said. "My response -- first of all, I was shocked and surprised -- but within a second or two of seeing the pistol, it was 'Hey, let's stay calm here. What can I do, and how can I help you?' is what I remember saying. And his response was, he wanted everyone to get on the ground."
Rapatz said he held steady and didn't respond to the demand. "He was pretty much in control and anything could have happened. I was just trying to calm the situation. I was trying to defuse it."
The boy again demanded, more forcefully, that the students lay on the floor. Rapatz told the boy: "No. I can help you; what do you need?" The boy turned and left without saying a word, Rapatz said.
This is the way it's done in a sensible world. Teachers aren't carrying concealed weapons waiting for a situation like this. The intention is to defuse not to escalate and certainly not to shoot eigth-graders. Of course, no one system works all the time, but this is a perfect example of how it should work.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Defusing the situation only works when the other party is capable of being defused.
ReplyDeleteThe 40+ bullet riddled bodies from the past two weeks in Chicago show that some people refuse to be defused. Some people just want to kill.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"in concealed carry class you are taught to do everything you can to avoid pulling your weapon."
ReplyDeleteI call 'baloney' on this.
The very fact you're so insecure that you feel the compelling need to parade around with a firearm means you're very likely to pull the weapon. In fact, you'll probably pull it not in some life-threatening circumstance but when you're annoyed or feeling poorly about yourself.
There's a very famous study that was done in Sweden years ago. ABS had just been invented and the engineers wanted to get some large scale data. So they outfitted half of a city's taxis with ABS and left the other half with conventional braking systems. They expected that after some period of time, the taxis equipped with ABS would average fewer accidents than those without. However,, the results turned out to be the opposite. Subsequent analysis showed that those ABS taxis tended to drive faster, follow closer, etc. because they believed they had a superior braking system.
WRT CCW classes--most are taught by those with no real qualifications.
--JadeGold
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJade,
ReplyDeleteWhat did they teach you at all of the CCW courses you have taken?
Wow, you'd have to try hard to have more fabricated, unsubstantiated bullshit in one comment than what we just saw from Jade.
ReplyDeleteA SWAT team’s first, second, and third priority is to defuse the situation peacefully. But they still bring guns.
ReplyDeleteJade Gold: “They expected that after some period of time, the taxis equipped with ABS would average fewer accidents than those without. However,, the results turned out to be the opposite.”
Which is why ABS is now standard on every Volvo, and almost every other car sold in the US. Some “study”. Did they also determine that airbags and seatbelts are a bad idea?
TS - FWIW my 2004 Honda Civic that I leased until 2007 did not have ABS. Then again that car was like ~$15K brand new.
ReplyDeleteMikeW, yeah that’s why I didn’t say “all cars”. I have had a few rentals without it as well, and as you pointed out, it is for cost reasons.
ReplyDelete"A SWAT team’s first, second, and third priority is to defuse the situation peacefully. But they still bring guns."
ReplyDeleteSo...now you're a SWAT team?
"Which is why ABS is now standard on every Volvo, and almost every other car sold in the US. Some “study”. Did they also determine that airbags and seatbelts are a bad idea?"
Actually, Volvo engineers were doing the testing. The phenomena is called "risk compensation" although some call it "offset hypothesis." There have been similiar studies in Canada, Germany, and Denmark with the same results.
There's no question ABS is a superior braking system but the fact you miss in your boundless ignorance is that people tend to adjust their behavior when they perceive their risk to be less.
Similarly, CCW holders often believe they are invincible because they parade around with a gun. What else could explain NRA member and CCW holder Charles Alan Wilson's repeated threats to kill Senator Murray of WA?
--JadeGold
"Please don't take my word for it. Attend a CCW class and see for yourself. It might clear up some other misconceptions you seem to have."
ReplyDeleteYou do realize that Jade intentionally peddles in misconception? Actually attending an event, be it a gun show or concealed carry class, would clear up nothing.
"What else could explain NRA member..."
ReplyDeleteAny proof or is this just more of your lies?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJadegold: “So...now you're a SWAT team?”
ReplyDeleteWhat is your point? That SWAT teams don’t engage in standoffs or negotiations?
Jadegold: “There's no question ABS is a superior braking system but the fact you miss in your boundless ignorance is that people tend to adjust their behavior when they perceive their risk to be less.”
And what was the net result of these studies? That ABS saves lives, right? The superior performance outweighs the behavior change- big surprise. Why else would Volvo make it standard? Now, with your boundless acumen, please explain to me why carrying a superior means for self-protection couldn’t possibly have a similar effect to be weighed against behavior change.
Jadegold: “What else could explain NRA member and CCW holder Charles Alan Wilson's repeated threats to kill Senator Murray of WA?”
Because he wants him dead. Please explain to me how removing his CCW or his NRA membership would cause him to not want the senator dead anymore.
TS: No, the studies do not show ABS saves lives. Quite the opposite.
ReplyDeleteListen, this isn't rocket science. Most people wouldn't dream of tackling a 225 lb person running directly at them. However, put on a football helmet and shoulder pads and they would.
Booth's rule #2, states: "The safer skydiving gear becomes, the more chances skydivers will take, in order to keep the fatality rate constant"
WRT NRA member and CCW holder Charles Alan Wilson, he clearly adjusted his behavior based on his gun fetish to feel safe enough to make repeated death threats to a US Senator.
--JadeGold
Jadegold: “No, the studies do not show ABS saves lives. Quite the opposite.”
ReplyDeleteYet it is universally accepted by every car manufacturer to be a good idea. If it is not standard, it is an option. If you dispute this please show me proof of some Swedish or Danish company that refuses to put ABS in their cars for safety reasons.
Jadegold: “WRT NRA member and CCW holder Charles Alan Wilson, he clearly adjusted his behavior based on his gun fetish to feel safe enough to make repeated death threats to a US Senator.”
Because clearly before he had a CCW he would have never done such a thing? Are there at least family members on record supporting your theory? Maybe it’s his distain for healthcare reform that started this behavior, but you’d have to actually listening to what he was saying to make that leap.
Jadegold: “Listen, this isn't rocket science. Most people wouldn't dream of tackling a 225 lb person running directly at them. However, put on a football helmet and shoulder pads and they would.”
ReplyDeleteWould you?
Once again, I am not arguing against your risk compensation statement. What I have been saying is that the benefits far outweigh the risk. You’ve acknowledge the performance benefit of ABS, but will you acknowledge that there is a benefit to carrying self-protection. You can still believe the risks outweigh it (I am just looking for baby steps here).
JadeGold"
ReplyDeleteCharles Alan Wilson is DEAD to the NRA, they will not be be returning his calls OR renewing his membershi--, oh, wait, he didn't KILL the president, he only threatened a congressman, never mind.
Do you really think standing there and saying "How can I help you?" is an effective method of stopping psychos like those at Columbine and Virginia Tech?
ReplyDeleteDon't be ridiculous. If this was a valid method, cops wouldn't carry firearms.
It's great it worked out this way, best of all worlds.
ReplyDeleteSo were the teachers at Columbine, NIU, etc. all just idiots for not doing the right thing?
Instead of fighting for gun control, it's time you started a "teach teachers how to talk to killers" blog.
Because apparently the only time a crazy person shoots someone is when the person who first sees them doesn't ask what to do for them and defuse the situation.
Clearly the victims, not the guns, are to blame.
RuffRidr said, "Trying to defuse a situation and carrying concealed are not mutually exclusive."
ReplyDeleteThanks for that. I'd bet lots of CCW guys could use the reminder.
I realize this wouldn't have worked in some of the famous cases, Orthus. But it sure worked in this one, did it not?
Notice our gunloons believe there exists only two options: cower in fear (likely on your knees) while offering up your family as sacrifices in exchange for your life...or boldly and manfully pull your CCW from its manfully and tasteful fanny pack holster and blow away the psycho killer while adoring females exclaim how manful you are.
ReplyDeleteOf course, this ignores the several thousand other options such as, well, making it difficult to impossible for psychos to get firearms..or closing the gunshow loophole which makes it easy for criminals and crazies to get guns or actually having some standard for gun ownership beyond having a pulse..or etc, etc.
---JadeGold
JadeGold, I can't imagine why you inspire such enmity from some of the gun guys. To me, what you say makes perfect sense. Thanks for coming around and saying it.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRuffRidr, I have never taken a CCW course, but I'd bet they're terribly insufficient. Guys like Xavier and maybe you, are perhaps adequately trained, but the average joe who proudly owns a CCW license, I doubt it. That's why I say what I say. As to the stats you referred to, I don't trust them. I think it's entirely possible that many crimes are committed by CCW license holders and it never comes up. I think the Brady Campaign and the Gun Guys probably have to do some digging to uncover the cases they do and many others go undetected.
ReplyDeleteJadegold, lying as usual. No one here has said there's only 2 options, and only a simpleton would conclude that only 2 exist.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSo basically MikeB's making a judgment about something he knows not one damn thing about.
ReplyDeleteColor me surprised. Ignorance is an ugly thing.
MikeB: :JadeGold, I can't imagine why you inspire such enmity from some of the gun guys. To me, what you say makes perfect sense.”
ReplyDeleteEven the part about killer ABS?
Jade, I thought we had a good dialog going and I asked some good questions without calling you a liar. Why no response?
MikeB: “I think it's entirely possible that many crimes are committed by CCW license holders and it never comes up. I think the Brady Campaign and the Gun Guys probably have to do some digging to uncover the cases they do and many others go undetected.”
Likewise there are crimes committed by non-CCW holders that go undetected. Shall we speculate on how many of those there are?
RuffRidr wants to know about my idea that the CCW training is insufficient. "Based on what?"
ReplyDeleteWell, based on my own experience in the summer of 1970. I had the Marine Corps basic training on Parris Island. It was extra condensed to just 9 weeks then because of Viet Nam.
Can we assume the CCW course is nothing like that? Can we further assume that many of the licensees don't continue training regularly afterwards?
That's why I say it's probably insufficient even though I've never been there.
MikeB: “Well, based on my own experience in the summer of 1970. I had the Marine Corps basic training on Parris Island. It was extra condensed to just 9 weeks then because of Viet Nam.”
ReplyDeleteSo if CCW training was a 9 week program on an island, it still wouldn’t be enough for you?
Thankfully, it still takes more training to go into a combat zone than an American city. And learning to use a simple handgun for close range self defense is much easier than learning to engage enemy troops in different terrains with mixed weapons systems as part of a military unit.
ReplyDeleteBut that's just ignorant that you anti-gun guys believe pro-gun guys think there are only 2 options: shoot or be helpless.
Pulling a firearm is not plan A, B, or C. It's what you do when there are no other options. I've taken several classes that qualify for CCW over the years and all teach this concept. The NRA course requires that a lawyer come in and talk about the legal implications of drawing, much less using, a firearm. And believe me ... after hearing his stories you definitely know that the idea of CCW is NOT to shoot someone at the first opportunity, but to have a weapon available if the unthinkable happens and it's fight back with lethal force or die.
Drawing a firearm can invoke both civil and cirminal liability. the criminal liability is fairly easy to deal with as long as you stayed within the law, but the standard for civil liability is much lower. There are many people who have lost their life's savings because they used drew a gun under the wrong circumstances.
Though losing your life's savings is much better than losing your life or that of a loved one, or even of being put in jail, of course.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete